attended council hearings in person. You've tuned in to our televised proceedings on channel 13. Now you have the chance to listen to us on the radio as we demystify our work and the people who do it. This is not a council hearing. This is hearing the council with your host Josh Gibson. >> Thank you deep voice person with a funky backbeat. Indeed, this is not a council hearing. This is hearing the council. You can't have a government without a council. So, you can't have a government radio station without a council show. This is it. I'm Josh Gibson, director of communications for the council. You may also know me as our voice on social media. Um, and at Council of DC uh and um we are joined by our most prolific and kind and courteous um council member Ward Ones Brienne Nadau. Thank you so much for uh for being with us once again. I think this is number 14. >> Wow. It's quite it's been quite the journey. >> It has been quite the journey. I don't know what I'm going to do without you. We have a number of months before we need to deal with this. Um and your communication staff had suggested some vague exit interview kind of questions for for this interview. And I'm like, she's around till January. I I'm not committing her to anything, but something tells me between now and January, she's gonna do at least one more interview. >> I don't know. I might get senioritis and bail on you, Josh. You never know. >> I feel like I'm kind of one of the last things to go. >> You know, it's there's plenty of hearings and stuff you can pass on, but this this is one of a kind. >> There you go. Uh but yeah, so we we do have we um there are let's see April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December uh left and you still have active legislative priorities. >> Yeah. >> As you should. Um one we did an entire show on, but I'd love to get an update on uh which is the bottle bill. >> Yeah. Okay. You want to do that now? >> It's happening. It's real. Um so update us on what has happened since our last conversation a few months back. >> Yeah. Well um the bill has advanced to the transportation and the environment committee which is chaired by Charles Allen. It's a friendly home for the bill and um they're working on tweaks to it. you know, there were some recommendations from the business committee that um they're taking into consideration, but they're also going to be holding a round table on it um just to get a little bit more public input in specific areas that had gotten a lot of attention. So, I'm I'm very pleased with Council Member Allen's stewardship of it. Um I know that they're working very hard to to advance it, so I feel good about it. There'll be the usual attacks um that come from the National Beverage Association and that oftentimes show up as a local concern. Um but we know that playbook. So as long as the 11 co-introducers stick together, we should be fine. >> I mean I see that being a a um marathon roundt. It is I think an invite only round table with >> oh >> a couple of like um specific panels. >> Gotcha. >> I don't think anybody needs a repeat of the hearing that happened in the committee on business and economic development because there was a lot of great testimony that day. It's not nice to make people come out and do it a second time. Um yeah important that the the T& committee gets to put their stamp on it too. Yeah. And how and I should know this and I don't the sequencing um was it sequenced uh deliberately to go to the business and economic development committee first and and transportation second or >> it was um it was a sequential referral. Um, it was supposed to be released from the business committee, I think first March, and then it was June and then got bumped to November because council member McDuffy wanted more time with it. Um, and then so it's been with transportation and the environment since November >> and they could choose to do a cattle call marathon uh hearing, but out of kindness to the witnesses, they're just going to make them >> Yeah. I also think, you know, it it, you know, what kind of point are you trying to prove to do the same thing over and over again, right? I I I love the idea that Charles has adopted here, which is let's get a little more input in a public setting, but let's make sure it's the input that we need to advance the bill. So, I am excited about that. >> And what you you've mentioned a couple times there are specific things that they're trying to kind of hone in on and and uh get more detail on. What what are the kind of things that what are kind of things are those? >> Um, one of the sticking points has been with the local distributors. So like the breweries and the wineries that are located in DC, we know that the volume they're producing is not really the issue here. And so I think he just wants to hear from them a little bit more about what the burden would be and whether that, you know, including them still makes sense. Um, I think hearing more from the environmental advocates and from the industry, um, the recycling industry and the bottling industry, etc., I think is all useful just for additional input. But I think, uh, I don't know who he's inviting, uh, but I am getting ready to mark my calendar. So, >> and what is your, uh, guesstimate for the timetable straight through the process, straight through to votes? Um, I'm not sure on that yet. Um, but I think that he's working on it in earnest, which is great news. Everybody knows I'm not going to be here next year, so >> this year is great. >> Got to work backwards from there. >> Yeah. >> But but do you think the council vote, the full council votes will come fairly quickly after the uh the TNA roundt? >> Uh, I do. I do. I do. Gotcha. >> Yeah. And uh one thing that we've seen is uh we've seen public-f facing support and opposition start to generate that I was minding my business reading the Washington Post online and a popup showed up for what was kind of a shell website. didn't seem like there was a ton of content there, but you could tell that it was kind of the placeholder for future opposition. Um, have you gotten kind of your first taste of you knew what was coming? I mean, there's a playbook, but have you gotten kind of your first taste of what how they're coming and >> Oh, yeah. I mean, they've done some push polls, um, some ads, uh, some emails. Um, I assume once there's a a final bill, it'll it'll come even more fast and furious. Um, it's a good investment to try to oppose it here in the District of Columbia because we only need seven votes to get it done, whereas like a state legislature, you know, you need hundreds. So, um I'm sure that we're going to be high on their list of targets, especially because it's, uh kind of breaks the seal, uh since there hasn't been one in, you know, 20 plus years, uh if we if we get one done, I think that creates a domino effect. But, um I I expect it. Um we're prepared for it. We'll push back. We don't have billions of dollars to spend, but um we do have a lot of support. So, And I did see one of the arguments that they uh were pushing that did resonate with me. I'm generally supportive of the bill, but they the word sticky. They used the word sticky a lot. That the fear that everything would become sticky. That the stores would be sticky and your bags, you brought the stuff to the store, it would be sticky. And I'm very team not sticky. >> Yeah. I mean, be dirty. Wash your bottles, man. >> Yeah. I mean, did they do I I just wonder what kind of research they did to find that sticky was something that >> the word that was going to make your skin crawl. >> Yeah. And it's not just me. I mean, I assume that they did testing and they figured out that resonated with people, but um >> yeah, I don't know. But it's not it doesn't seem to really be an issue. I mean, the the machines won't take the dirty ones, and I think most people are going to use machines, but even for what we call bagdrop, you know, people need to wash them out or they're not going to get their money. So, it's it's um there are there's precedent for that, let's say. >> How do the machines not take the dirty ones? >> I don't know how they do it. The technology is very cool. You know, when I was growing up in Michigan, we didn't have this sort of thing. So, >> right. Sounds like technology had has advanced very well. Um, and it's also self-contained, right? So, let's say a dirty bottle makes it through, it's in there. It's not on the ground. It's >> it's inside the container. So, um, >> and the other thing I saw them pushing was a bug and rodent, fear of bug and rodent. So, how do how do the machines in particular stay safe from that? I mean, hope that a grocery store is already safe from that. Um, >> yeah, they're I mean it's because they're they're self-contained machines. I mean, you can't you're not once those bottles and cans are inside, they're inside, you know? So, I get it. We need to get the rats under control. I have one constituent who I've seen a lot lately who every time I see him goes, "The rats are winning. I need to make him a t-shirt." I think um his new catchphrase, but I don't think it's because of bottles and cans, per se. I think it's because of some other waste management issues we need to take on as a city, including reducing organic waste and uh better containers. >> Yeah. I mean, if the rats made it through the snowcrete and all that, um mosquitoes, too, I'm hearing somehow were able to survive. It's not It's not good. >> Yeah. The rats just go underground. It's not Anyway, >> rats. We should talk about uh >> um now >> at some point >> one more thing on bottle bill. Um so I've also seen uh grassroots support uh popping up. I've seen in addition all the political sign political candidate signs that are up. I've seen uh posters supporting the bottle bill. Um what would you do expect there to be more of that? >> Yes. No. I mean, that's really organic and the coalition that works on that is, you know, volunteers who are doing their best and getting those signs out to anybody who wants them, but also has limited time and money. So, you know, I think that'll be slow and steady, but it's probably not going to be as much as the onslaught from the billionaire soda companies, you know. >> Yeah. And I did notice that the signs in support were the plastic signs, the more durable plastic signs. >> Yeah. >> Hoping those are on recycled plastic. >> I'm sure they're recycled plastic. But um yeah, and if you want to sign, you can go to R3DC and they'll hook you up. >> There you go. Um okay, so that's the bottle bill. Um I want to talk about another bill that uh came through the council recently, which is the uh one front door bill. Um, let's talk uh let's talk about that because I think it's a fascinating concept that of all uh all the conversation around how we need more housing in DC, we need more density, we need more affordable housing, what would not have occurred to me was let's modify building code stair quantity regulations. >> Oh yeah. Well, you don't live in the code the way some of us do, which is good for you. I don't recommend it, but um >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, >> but talk talk about that because it's a it's a fascinating it's a fascinating concept. >> Sure. And and it's it's part of a movement right now in the United States because in other parts of the world, this type of building is is typical. There's a few cities, uh Seattle comes to mind. Um I know state of Connecticut has um there's some others where um they've done this with the building code. Here's the the basic premise. Um if you have an extra staircase, you have less room to build housing units inside a building. and building code requiring a front and rear staircase for egress was put into place before things like sprinklering, fire doors, and other fire code, fire safety enhancements in the building code. So, this bill advises the the building codes commission that uh we want to see them update it and and so they'll they'll take the bill, they'll work on ress um and they'll move forward by I believe 2027 they have to to finish the work once this bill is passed. So, it's good news. it it's not going to mean that everybody's going to start tearing down their medium-sized buildings and tearing out a staircase and putting in more housing, but it does mean when a a building is um substantially changed or when a new building goes up, this provides an opportunity to put more housing units in it. At the hearing, we heard a great deal of support um honestly can't even remember. or I think maybe there was one person who testified in opposition, but there's just a great deal of support for this as something that's considered a modern aspect of building codes and proven um and I'm excited about it because I'm all about building more housing. It's something that's been signature uh thing for me over the years. And I think kind of if anyone had any concerns about the bill once they hear that it's been the law in New York City for decades and decades and decades, I think that's um there's nothing more compelling than that. I know other cities, other states have chipped, but like if New York City has done this and has done it for years, given their extraordinary density >> Yeah. Um, and of course, God forbid there were was an incident that um happened, we would hear about it and we haven't. So, that is kind of the uh proof is in the pudding. >> Yep. Absolutely. So, I think that uh we are scheduled for a second reading at the next legislative meeting and uh I'm thrilled. Hopefully, it'll stay on the consent agenda and keep moving. And what is because I don't think are are people still building fire escapes on new buildings or fire escapes just kind of a vestage of time gone by? >> Good question. I don't really know. I mean, I've seen like rear stair exterior like I lived in a duplex that had an exterior um spiral staircase because I but that was more I think because the parking was in the back, right? >> So, the upper unit needed a way to get back to their parking spaces. Um but no, I don't I don't I don't know. And see and this is why we say now building code coordinating commission please take your grand knowledge of the whole code incorporate what we want to see as a policy into the regs of the code because that's what you're the experts on and you can figure out if if this needs another component like exterior fire escape etc. >> Right? cuz I the building that I live in if it were built if it were built new today would be under the old two stairwell uh requirement and under the new law would have would require only one stair. We only have one stair in the building because it's 100y old building. >> Yeah. >> But we do have fire escapes. So, that's kind of like and I'm 100% comfortable with the setup we have, but and we also don't have sprinklers because it's an old building, which is a key difference. And we don't have uh fire doors at at landings, >> right? You have a big open staircase, right? >> Yeah. A big um Wilson building style um grand staircase that apparently is is not great for fire safety. >> No, probably not. You know, it's interesting. Some of the statistics I've seen though is that the majority of the um the majority of the mortality incidents with fires in buildings like this is people who don't get out of their unit as opposed to people who don't get out of the building. >> True. >> Yeah. >> True. >> Yeah. And I know there was a bit of push back with the question of if residents were trying to get out and firefighters were trying to get in, would that cause a bottleneck in the stairs? But I suppose even if you had two stairwells, you'd still have the same problem. You'd still have outgoing and incoming and >> right, it's not like people are going to pick the staircase that's more convenient to the fire department, right? They're just going to go and hopefully they go quickly, right? and hopefully they go even before the fire department gets there. But um it is to me that it seems like um it's a good question to ask, but I don't think it's a a concern that uh necessarily needs to be addressed systemically. I think it that's unfortunately more about human behavior, >> right? And again, kind of this is where the New York City argument comes in that if that was a thing, we would have heard about it. they would have not let it happen or you know they would have had to change a path because they realized there was a problem of bottlenecking in the stairs. >> Correct. Correct. >> Um so are there any other uh tweaks to the code that allow us to get kind of more housing out of the same building envelope? Um or is that kind of the the obvious win? >> Uh that's the obvious one for the building code. Now, if you want to talk zoning code, that's another ball of wax. The the Office of Planning just released their draft comprehensive plan and it was incredibly disappointing. Now, for people who don't know, the comprehensive plan is the blueprint for all the things we build in the city. And um in the last comp plan rate rewrite, I actually put in a provision to commission a study on um single family zoning and the impact that making apartments illegal in most parts of the city has had on affordable housing. Um which didn't it not surprisingly said well actually it's had a big impact. Um, so one of the places that I would focus in on in the zoning code, uh, were I to be here when, um, the council takes up the comp plan, I will not be, but if I were, would be, um, legalizing apartments everywhere. You know, the there are so many parts of the city where you can only build a single family home, and that's what's holding us back more than really anything. All the infill, the work we're doing on the one front door, it's it's hugely important because we want every lever But the zoning code is what's holding us back. And you know, it's funny. A lot of people talk about the height act, right? There's a there's a congressionally imposed restriction on how high buildings can be here in the city. And it's a little bit of a red herring. I mean, I think we should eliminate the height act because um we it's our city and Congress shouldn't get us get to tell us how tall to build, but um it's not really the problem. We could actually double the amount of housing we have right now if we fix the zoning code and leave the HUD act intact. So, that's my two cents. And what what are the arguments for when folks say they don't want apartments in entire neighborhoods or on on entire blocks in entire neighborhoods? >> The character of the neighborhood would change. >> Yeah. I mean it's when you I as an Adams Morgan resident I mean there within a hundred yards of my fourstory building there are single family homes with four walls and there are 10story apartment buildings >> and it it all works you know and the reason we can have all the great restaurants and cultural place uh you know destinations we have in the neighborhood is because there is the density and the variety. Um, so why people would spurn that? >> Well, W one is special because we don't have anywhere you that still restricts to single family only. So that's pretty great. Uh, but you live in an area in linear Heights that is actually uh has downzoned in recent history. >> And that that's probably it's probably one of the only places in the city that's downzoned in the past I don't know. So that was about 2014, I think. >> Right. Um, which was an interesting thing because there had been a movement, you'll remember, to actually make an historic district and that failed. And so then folks went for the downzoning instead to preserve the character of the neighborhood. Right. >> Right. >> And that did succeed. Um, and so what that does mean is those homeowners can't build higher than they've got right now. Um, you can't do in those blocks, you can't do what um, some have done in other parts of the city where you say turn a single family home with a basement into a duplex. um which you know in other parts of like you live in a large multif family building on a block that also has single family homes. So it's um it was an interesting choice for that part of the city in particular because everything around it, you know, has a lot more flexibility with the zoning. So it happens. It happens, >> right? And it and it's also, you know, as uh living where I live, I've lived for 20 years, and when we moved in, we had a capital view, just the tippy tip of the capital uh view from our bedroom, and we had a cathedral view from our living room. And because of development on two of the sides, now we look out and we see walls. And it's, you know, I miss the old views, but like you got to put your money where your mouth is. And if you're a city person and you support density and you hate traffic and you want transit to succeed, um, and you want affordable housing, even if it impacts you, which it does for us, you got to kind of swallow. I mean, hopefully no one has to make that hard decision or no one has to look out a window and see a wall, but um I wish folks could kind of look beyond the but the character of my block. I've it's way for 50 years. Like come on people like take one take one for the team. >> Well, you were on the ANC. I was on the ANC. I feel like we we always had these conversations with people about, you know, you don't you don't own your view, right? You own your four walls, but you do not own your view. Um, and the question is, do you love your neighbors? Do you love your community? Do you love your city? And do you want to keep loving everybody around you? Then they got to be able to afford to live in the city. And that means we got to build more housing for the people who want to live here and be able to afford here. And that's that's the that's the the core of it, you know. And you you do feel that at some point the supply will the supply demand intersection will start forcing down the price housing because I know that the primary argument is we need supply supply spy. We need more supply and eventually the price will crest and start to decrease but we haven't seen a ton of evidence of that yet. >> Well, we're not even close to reaching that point. That's the problem really. I mean the in word one because we are one of the only places in the city you can build anything we have a lot of pressure on us and it doesn't bring the price down around because of the the density of it. Um if that were more evenly spread across the city I think you'd see those prices coming down faster but at the moment in terms of sheer volume we're just not even close to it. And that's one of the reasons why, you know, you've got to support building housing of all income levels all across the city. But in the meantime, we also and and I in particular have supported things like rental assistance and building subsidized housing and, you know, making sure that we're building at lower income levels as often as possible and that government resources are investing in that and also giving people the opportunity at home ownership through the HPAT program. I mean, these are all they all go together, but the underlying zoning code is what holds us back on reaching these goals, and that's why the comprehensive H plan is so important and why the one that was released a couple weeks ago is so disappointing. So, it seems like once again the council's going to have their hands full on the comp plan. I'm sure Chairman Medson's going to abley steer us again, but um you know, I think you'll hear a lot from council members who are fighting for more housing as that debate ensues. >> Now, how did the draft map end up so disappointing? I mean, I can't speak for the Office of Planning, but seems like nobody wanted to push the envelope, which is sad because I don't really know that we're pushing the envelope anymore. This seems like settled policy, but I don't know. Maybe it's a product of the mayor being in her last year or two and like not wanting to have to deal with the headache of the fights. I don't know. >> Yeah. Running through the tape and not running through the red tape. Exactly. >> Um, okay. So, we're uh near the end. Um, are there any other bills uh that you have on the radar screen for your remaining threequarters of a year that uh you are trying to push through that you want to highlight quickly? >> Yeah. So, we talked a little bit about the work I'm doing on housing with the One Front Door Act, but there's another big piece that I've been working on which is about how we finance housing development. and I've introduced a housing production omnibus bill. It creates what we call the housing opportunity fund. This is a reinvisioning of the housing production trust fund which in its early days was transformational and it is still something that cities and states across the country try to replicate. But what we've learned over the years is we could be more strategic with the way that we use our public funds when it comes to housing development. And so this creates five different funds under the housing opportunity fund. The first one is meant to spur building just building anything um and building anything as long as it it meets uh fair market value because once you've built anything we can work together with you to subsidize certain parts of it using the second fund so that we then have that affordable housing. There's also a fund for preservation of existing housing. There's a fund for tenant purchase under the tenant opportunity to purchase act and then there's a fund for land acquisition and property acquisition which could allow us to better use the district opportunity to purchase act which has never really been used in all the years it's existed on the books. All those things together are going to help us produce more housing and cut through that red tape we were talking about earlier because it says to builders essentially we want you here. We want you to build um we want to make it affordable for people, but we don't want the affordability to to to be the hurdle that gets you to put your shovels in the ground because we can work that all out on the back end. And frankly, it's a lot of what we do now anyway. The housing production trust fund is challenging because we will subsidize um the building of housing, but then on the back end, we don't provide an operating subsidy. That project can't really be approved anyway. So, this this really has streamlined a lot of the stuff that's been happening ad hoc that has slowed things down across the city and I'm very excited about it. It had a hearing on March 30th. So, it's with the housing committee. I think they're eager to advance it because it's a really substantial piece of legislation that can can change the way we produce housing here. >> And is this like a 2.0? Is this something the housing production trust fund would morph into or >> Okay. Okay. So, it would replace thousand production trust fund. >> Absolutely. It's an homage, but it would replace it. >> Gotcha. Any other little bills, little pet projects you want to mention before we go to the fun round? >> Oh my god. What is the fun round? Is it going to be food again? >> Uh, there'll be some food. I It's hard. We've done 13 of these. So, you get to try out all the new fun rounds. And I've just made up like stuff laying around the house. Like, what do you think of this vase? >> Oh, it's free association, isn't it? >> Yeah. No, no. Got We got I I kind of cheated. I kind I saw people doing this on TV and I decided >> Oh, okay. Well, if it's people doing it on TV, I definitely haven't seen it because I never have time anymore. So, why don't we just get it over with? >> Okay. Um, so it's it's this or that. You've probably you might have heard this before and I'm just going to give you a choice and you have to tell me which one you prefer. >> Oh god. >> Um, burgers or hot dogs? >> Hot dogs. >> Okay. Coffee or tea? >> Tea. >> Okay. Uh, hot or iced? >> Iced. >> Okay. And are you not a coffee person or you just prefer tea? >> I don't drink coffee. >> Don't drink coffee. Okay. I don't think I knew that. Um, okay. Here's a good one. Bagel toasted or untoasted? >> Oh, untoasted. >> You see, this is where I I know that like you're not supposed to get it toasted if it's freshly baked and from a reputable provider, but I just my whole life have grown up toasting bagels. >> What? I need to talk to your mother. >> I Yeah, she I know where she lives. >> Grew up the same way. And my grandmother toasted bagels. I maybe it's cuz we didn't have access to good bagels. So like at that point, you know, toasting them probably helps a terrible bagel >> butter on them, too. >> No. >> Okay. Phew. >> No, not not team butter. >> Okay. >> Um I I knew the bagel one would work. Um movies or live theater? >> Uh movies. >> Okay. And is that is that because of family time pressures or babysitters or is that just >> I like live theater, but I like my favorite thing to do live would be a musical. >> And I actually really enjoy going to the movies. I also I do that as rarely as I go to a live theater at this point unless it's like Paw Patrol Live or Dogman Live. >> Okay, I know Paw Patrol. I do not know Dog Man. >> That's good. Don't look it up. >> Okay, I I won't. But yeah, >> you don't need it in your life. Trust me. >> I still get Paw Patrol theme songs stuck in my head like now many many years later. >> I think that should be our outro music today. >> Yeah, we could. Um Okay. Would you like to visit the past or the future? >> The past. >> Why? >> Um I'm a genealogy person. >> Yeah. I like I I like um knowing more about my ancestors and and history. >> So you'd visit your past people, not like a historic event, >> I think. So >> yeah. Um and the last uh question that came to mind as I and I might already see the answer between what's behind you and what's behind me. Are you minimalist or maximalist decorator? Huh? Uh, I am actually a minimalist. You know, this is Mary Chay's office. I will never think of it as my own. But the art on the walls all comes from the art bank. >> Yeah. >> And uh I have a particular colleague who picks out all the art. All the art back there is either from W one or represents something in Ward One. And um it's all very special. >> Yes. I I went out to the art bank uh warehouse and we redid the art in the office of the secretary and that was good fun. I I'd always heard about council members going out to the warehouse and it was one of those like wait we have walls um and uh yeah that's that's very cool and very good fun. >> Yeah. At our house it's kid art. So >> yeah, >> like if we were doing this and I was home, you'd see uh hand painted children's watercolors behind my head. So >> yeah, you can do a lot worse than kids art than your own kids art. >> Right. Right. >> That that's the key distinction. >> Yeah. Not in the market for other people's kids art. >> No. No. Not not a strong market for that anywhere. >> Um okay. Well, we as always have have blown past our time. Um but thank you once again. And I I hope I will see you uh perhaps once more um between now and January for another interview. At some point we'll do the exit interview, but >> for sure >> not this. Um so anyway uh viewers, thank you uh as always for your fidelity. Uh remember to subscribe to our podcast on Soundcloud or wherever you get your podcast. Just search under Hearing the Council. Thanks again listeners for joining us. Tune in next time. We're on DC Radio 96.3 FM on your HD4 dial or at dcradio.gov. I'm Josh Gibson. This is not a council hearing. This is hearing the council. Thanks, council member. Take care. See you around the building.