An interesting bit of discussion on how much information the city provides to the community, came up as part of the public comment session of Monday's Council session.
And from some of the observations found on the night, it might be suggested that there is a desire from the city's residents to have better access to information on such areas of interest as the City's Legacy Fund and other segments of public spending by our elected officials.
As part of the Committee of the Whole session Monday a number of residents took to the microphone to outline their concerns over the recent cuts to the Library funding, during the course of that one hour overview, one participant expanded his inquiries towards some concerns related to the City's Legacy Fund and some of the other spending initiatives that Council has taken on over the last year.
Mayor Brain spoke to a number of items related to the Legacy Fund and other spending issues on Monday night
The way that those topics were presented, resulted in a bit of push back from the Mayor, who expressed frustration with the tone and the method of approach to some of the questions.
Noting that in the case of the Legacy Corporation funding there is information available on the city's website as to how the city makes use of that money and to where it has been directed.
As well, on the theme of spending on civic initiatives, or travel, the Mayor and City Manager noted that the process of approval had changed over the years and that there is no longer any requirement to hold a public vote on some spending requests.
As a way to bring that segment of the discussion to a close, City Manager Robert Long suggested that the resident would be welcome to take as fine a tooth comb as he has to the city's information, seeming to suggest that digging deep into the past minutes and budget reports might deliver some of the answers that he was seeking.
And while that is one option, a better approach and one which might be welcomed by the residents of the city would be to make that information more easily accessible on the city's website.
However when it comes to a review of the full details and other items that might be of interest regarding that city instrument, the offering is rudimentary at best.
The current information portal provides mainly a listing of the Articles of Incorporation and not much more. Leaving anyone trying to find anything else out about the city's use of the fund, to have to drill deep into the agendas, minutes and other documents that the city posts on its website.
What isn't available at the moment for residents is a one stop reading kind of presentation. Providing a breakdown as to where the funds that have been received have been allocated and what projects they have been put towards, whether it be sidewalk repair, major infrastructure or other council projects.
Currently it seems that any information on Legacy Fund is lumped into the Council initiative known as planning for Major Projects, with little indication as to just what the city's residents are getting from their investment and what council has decided the money should be used for.
"The City is taking a hard look at the infrastructure deficit and coupling it with the impact from Major Projects. Planning is of the utmost priority for Council to ensure our City can be a model for how to successfully host large industrial growth. Maximizing the benefits of possible change while mitigating as much of the negative impacts will require additional resources. The City’s wholly owned subsidiary Legacy Inc. will contribute towards this additional cost with no impact to the taxpayers over the planned four year time frame that the Planning for Major Projects Budget has undertaken." -- From the Conclusion to the Spring 2015 Community Update
Considering the range of LNG Go Plans, Vision Statements and other civic initiatives of the last year such as the Re:Build Rupert updatesit probably shouldn't be too hard to provide a similar style of visual display that shows clearly and effectively for the community, just how the City is spending the money received through the Legacy Fund.
And while they're on that theme of disclosure, offering up a montly spending report on Council activities, whether they be from out of town travel, reflecting in town workshops or other such kinds of activities, probably would be a welcome addition to the flow of information for the public as well.
Those are concepts that other communities have explored with some success, providing reports and information outlines to their civic websites.
With such information in hand, the city's residents might even be able to help City Council when it comes to the Budget Consultation process later this Spring.
Using the information to offer suggestions at to what priorities that the city's residents might have for the fund, something that could be helpful in Council's search for that sixty six thousand dollar takeaway from the Library.
The theme of making better use of the Legacy Fund was the topic of this letter in the weekly newspaper this week, with the author also listing some concerns over how the money from the fund is being used.
As was noted by Councillor Cunningham in early January, "The Legacy Fund is owned by the people of this town, it is the residents money, as well as the council's money" which was a sentiment reprised in the letter to the paper yesterday.
It would seem that through the comments from the Public comment session at Council, or by way of a letter to the opinion page of the paper, that all that folks in Prince Rupert seem to want to know, is how the fund is being used.
Allowing them to shape their opinions when it comes to whether the City is making the right decisions when it comes to that spending.
The city's residents really shouldn't have to take that fine tooth comb to explore a range of Council minutes and documents, City Council should be making sure that the information that the public wants and deserves to have access to, is as easy to find as possible.
The discussion on the topic of the Legacy Fund from Monday night can be reviewed on the City's Video Archive, it starts at the thrity nine minute mark and continues for about ten minutes.
Recent cuts to the Prince Rupert Library budget made for a very hot topic during public comments at Monday's Prince Rupert Council Session
Mayor Lee Brain may have declared that Democracy has made a Decision when it comes the issue of reducing funding to the Library, but if the one hour Committee of the Whole Public comment session from Monday is an indication, not everyone in the community is all that impressed with Democracy at the moment.
Over the course of the majority of the sixty minutes that was used towards public comment on the night, a significant amount of the discussion involved members of the public that were very upset with the City's decision to take 66,000 dollars from the Library budget and re-allocate it to the Lester Centre and Museum of Northern British Columbia.
Five residents took the microphone to express that disappointment and pose a number of questions for council to consider relatedto their decision of January 11th.
Through the opening hour of the night, Council members heard a number of testimonials to the services provided by the Library and worries about what could happen to the institution with less money to work with.
Mayor Brain took some time out of the public comment period to explain the range of information that Council had reviewed in early January and what factors that they had considered to reach their decision.
One participant on the evening put a focus on the city's relationship with the Museum of Northern British Columbia and suggested that the City does not have enough oversight when it comes to the city's funding to that Society.
Adding that she believes that the current $126,000 funding level budgeted for the Museum should be halved and that $63,000 dollars of that money be returned to the Library, recommending that the City hold back in trust on funding for the Museum until it amends its current policies on public disclosure and that the money be released when the City can have an appointment to the Board of Directors of the Museum.
Councillor Cunningham offered up a rebuttal to some of those points related to the work of the Museum in the community, making note of where he believes the presentation may have been incorrect.
Also of some interest from the one hour were observations related to the building that the Museum of Northern British Columbia is located in and whether the city still has ownership involvement with it, leaving for a bit of confusion among Council members who asked for the Corporate Administrator to seek out clarification on the status.
To go along with the vignettes of just what the library means to the community, came concerns over how the Library funding reduction decision was made, as well as questions and suggestions on how the issue should have been approached.
Councillor Thorkelson outlined her disappointment and frustration at the Council's decision to reduce funding for the Prince Rupert Library
Included among those that expressed disappointment in Council's decision of two weeks ago was Councillor Joy Thorkelson, who took advantage of the moment to issue her first public comments related to that decision.
Observing that while the Mayor may feel that he speaks for Council, she believes that he speaks only for the majority of people who voted in favour of the funding reduction.
Calling the decision made earlier this month an error and a self imposed cap, something which she notes has forced the city to take money from Peter, to pay Paul.
She also reminded Council members that the City has added lots of money to the City's budget in the past year, with many items added to the City's burden, noting that she was in disagreement with how that was handled.
Ms. Thorkelson observed that the funding cut was done in an exceedingly poor manner, and by trying to take 66,000 dollars from the budget of the library in one fell swoop, it will put the library into the kind of financial pit that it was in just after the mill closed.
Reinforcing for good measure how the Mayor did not speak for her, she returned to her theme that the funding decision was poor one and that it was absolute idiocy to put in a cap that could not be lived in.
Her thoughts resulted in a sharp exchange with Councillor Niesh, who offered up a short comment noting Councillor Thorkelson's absence from that meeting and how she could have spoken to the issue at that time.
A response that brought a flash of anger from Ms. Thorkelson, who reminded Mr. Niesh of her commitments in the fishing industry, which required her to be out of town and unavailable for participation in that council session.
Another discussion point that proved a little contentious involved the presentation to Council from one resident that focused on how the City spends money, and issues related to the Legacy Fund and the city's process of information related to its spending.
A tone and line of questioning that had the Mayor fully engaged to defend the city's efforts over the last year and something which even drew the City Manager into the discussion to share some observations on how the City conducts its business.
For those around the city hoping for a sliver lining for the Library the Mayor brought the one hour open comment period to an end by pointing out for the public that Council was only starting to enter it's budget process and should they discover an additional 66,000 dollars from the budget they would immediately allocate it towards the Library.
More detailed background related to the Public Comment period can be found on our Council Timeline Feature.
You can review the full public comment period from the City's Video Archive, the call for comment comes about one minute into the evening and continues on until just past the one hour mark.
Plans to close a road on the west side of the city, part of a large scale development between Park Avenue and Graham Avenue have apparently hit a bit of a snag, as City Council removed the required Bylaw from consideration at this weeks Council Session.
Mayor Brain noted the decision to remove the Bylaw from the Agenda from Monday's meeting at the start of proceedings at the Council meeting.
Reading out a clarification statement related to the decision to withdraw the Road Closure Bylaw Motion for that evening's session. Noting some background related to the proposed road closure bylaw and the sale of closed road lands adjacent to Graham Avenue, advising that the City had removed the item from the Agenda.
The Mayor then informed the public that it had been discovered that the during the preparation of a secondary survey, that this process was unusable park land and not road right of way and as a result, the City is not currently able to proceed as indicated in the public notices related to this matter.
The proposed housing development that covers a fair amount of territory on the west side, was the subject of much discussion over the last year, with a number of issues and concerns raised at the time by some council members and residents of the area.
The letter outlines a number of concerns that the resident has when it comes to the prospect of the road closure, as well as calling into question some of the decisions that were made in relation to that proposed housing development.
There was no indication at Monday's council session when the bylaw would be returned to Council for further discussion or how the City would move forward on the issues related to it.
Monday night turned into a three hour marathon for the members of City Council featuring an evening of discussion, observations and a few flashes of frustration and temper percolating through the course of the evening.
It opened with a one hour Open Comment session for the public, with the majority of those approaching Council expressing their concern over the decision of Council in January to reduce funding for the City's Public Library.
Following that one hour discussion, Council turned to its Regular Agenda on the evening, featuring a report on the city's thoughts related to a 1km zone rule for liquor establishments in the community, a request for a variance permit for a property in the city and a zoning change request for a proposed housing development on Drake Crescent.
As well, Council received a number of Terms of References for three Committees that were under consideration on the night. While the Mayor delivered his latest update from the Housing Committee.
The evening wrapped up with comments from council members.
Further information from our overview and placement in the video archive can be found below, with the permanent record of the minutes added as they are posted to the city website.
In attendance January 25, 2016
Mayor Lee Brain-- Present
Councillor Barry Cunningham-- Present
Councillor Blair Mirau -- Present
Councillor Wade Niesh -- Present
Councillor Nelson Kinney-- Present
Councillor Gurvinder Randhawa-- Present
Councillor Joy Thorkelson -- Present
Video Archive for January 25 2016
Prior to the start of the Open portion of the Committee of the Whole, Mayor Brain noted the decision to remove a Bylaw proposal from the Regular Agenda from Monday's meeting. Reading out a clarification statement related to the decision to withdraw the Road Closure Bylaw Motion for that evening's session. Noting some background related to the proposed road closure bylaw and the sale of closed road lands adjacent to Graham Avenue, advising that the City had removed the item from the Agenda.
The Mayor then informed the public that it had been discovered that the during the preparation of a secondary survey, that this process was unusable park land and not road right of way and as a result the City is not currently able to proceed as indicated in the public notices related to this matter. ( 0:00 -- 1:03:00 ) Committee of the Whole The Mayor invited members the Public to approach the microphone to bring matters on interest to the attention of Council. Six members of the public gallery made presentations, the majority of them related to concerns over the decision by Council to reduce funding to the City's Public Library.
Many of the comments provided a testimonial to the importance of the Library to the Community, with concerns noted over the ability of the Library to provide services that the public.
To go along with those vignettes of just what the library means to the community, came concerns over how the funding decisions were made and questions and suggestions on how the issue should have been approached.
Included among those that expressed disappointment in Council's decision of two weeks ago was Councillor Joy Thorkelson, who took advantage of the moment to issue her first public comments related to that decision.
Observing that while the Mayor may feel that he speaks for Council, she believes that he speaks only for the majority of people who voted in favour of the funding reduction.
Calling the decision made earlier this month an error and a self imposed cap, something which she notes has forced the city to take money from Peter, to pay Paul.
She also reminded Council members that the City has added lots of money to the City's budget in the past year, with many items added to the City's burden, noting that she was in disagreement with how that was handled.
Ms. Thorkelson stated that the funding cut was done in an exceedingly poor manner, and by trying to take 66,000 dollars from the budget of the library in one fell swoop, it will put the library into the kind of financial pit that it was in just after the mill close.
Reinforcing for good measure how the Mayor did not speak for her, she returned to her theme that the funding decision was poor one and that it was absolute idiocy to put in a cap that could not be lived in.
Her thoughts resulted in a sharp exchange with Councillor Niesh, who offered up a short comment noting Councillor Thorkelson's absence from that meeting and how she could have spoken to the issue at that time. A response that brought a flash of anger from Ms. Thorkelson, who reminded Mr. Niesh of her commitments in the fishing industry, which required her to be out of town and unavailable for participation in that council session.
Another discussion point that proved contentious involved the presentation to Council from one resident that focused on how the City spends money, and issues related to the Legacy Fund and the city's process of information related to its spending.
A tone and line of questioning that had the Mayor fully engaged to defend the city's efforts over the last year and something which even drew the City Manager into the discussion, as he shared some observations on how the City conducts its business and reviewed some of the changes in procedure the city has adopted over the years.
One final participant on the evening shifted the focus of the discussion towards the number of LNG projects proposed for the region, Highlighting his concerns over the placement of some of them and the impact that they may have in the area. In particular he focused a fair bit of his attention towards the project proposed for the Tuck Inlet area and the concerns that he has regarding the impact of that project on the city's east side.
For those around the city hoping for a sliver lining for the Library the Mayor brought the one hour open comment period to an end by pointing out for the public that Council was only starting to enter it's budget process and should they discover an additional 66,000 dollars from the budget they would immediately allocate it towards the Library.
( 1:03:00 -- 1:04:00 ) Regular Council Session -- The Mayor outlined the past minutes and Agenda for the Monday evening session, which were accepted by council. Reports ( 1:04:00 --1:25:00 ) Presentation from the City Planner on the 1 km rule for liquor outlets in the community -- The City Planner provided an overview of the options Council had to consider on whether to create a bylaw to create a 1 km distance rule for liquor outlets in the community. Mr. Krekic's report was in response to a request from Councillor Cunningham at a previous council session. Of particular concern for Council was the prospect of the city's two grocery chains at some point seeking to sell wine in their Prince Rupert locations in a store within a store concept.
After discussion on the impact of allowing the grocery stores to sell wine and beer in their stores and whether the issue required a bylaw, or some other civic mechanism, Council chose to accept the recommendation to consider the issue as part of their review of the City's Official Community Plan.
( 1:25:00 -- 1:29:30 ) Report to Council on a request for a development variance permit for a property on Conrad Street -- After a review of the application and some discussion on the topic Council voted to approve the motion.
( 1:29:30 -- 1:58:00 ) Report from the City Planner on zoning changes related to a proposed Housing Development at Drake Crescent -- Mr. Krekic reviewed the nature of the zoning changes and outlined some background on the proposed housing development.
Council discussed a range of issues related to the zoning application as well as to general observations on the Drake Crescent proposal.
Councillor Thorkelson also outlined her thoughts on how the City should be approaching the growth of housing development proposals in the community to ensure for parks, public open spaces and other amenities as part of the process in the future.
On the Drake Crescent motion in front of Council, they moved forward with the zoning process and will hold a Public Hearing on the Drake Crescent proposal on February 22nd.
( 1:58:00 -- 1:59:30 ) Report from the Corporate Administrator on the General Election Bylaw -- The City's Corporate Administrator provided background to the issue and noted that the School District required a by-election to fill a vacancy on the local school district board, adding that the City had found that they did not have the sufficient staff on hand to hold the by-election and had put the process out to tender and awarded it to city resident Joe Zelwietro.
Mr. Mandryk then outlined the cost of the by-election process and asked for council to approve the bylaw request.
Councillor Mirau asked as to the timeline to adopt the bylaw and the city could move forward with the by-election for the School District. Mr. Mandryk advised Council that they would hold a special Council session on January 27th to move the process forward and then make the appointments of the Chief Electoral Officer and the Assistant EO at the February 9th Council session.
( 1:59:30 -- 2:14:00 ) Terms of Reference for the 2030 Mayor's Select Standing Committee on Sustainable Cities -- Mayor Brain outlined the terms of reference that would be in place to form his committee, noting it would focus on such issues as renewable energy production, food production and other sustainable related initiatives. With the goal of integrating them into the city's core planning objectives.
He added that the Committee would embrace three general areas, jobs and the economy, greener communities and social well being to help develop a culture of placemaking.
The makeup of the committee would consist of a combination of local experts and outside advisors where gaps exist in the local community, as well as select city to staff to ensure proper integration of policy into other areas of work that the city is moving forward on.
Councillor Thorkelson called the proposal an excellent idea, but took note of a number of items from the synopsis of the Mayor's Terms of reference. Noting the definition of it as a Mayor's Select Standing Committee, adding that she would prefer to see it as a Committee of Council.
She also expressed her concerns with that selective aspect of the proposal, suggesting that it might result in some in the community feeling as though there is no room for their participation,.
The City Manager also provided some background on the nature of Select Committees and how it would work in this particular instance, allowing the Mayor to appoint people from outside of Council.
The Mayor observed that Council was welcome to join in on the Committee and that he encouraged their involvement in the process.
Council then voted to accept the Terms of Reference for the Committee
( 2:14 -- 2:31:00 ) Terms of Reference for the Planning for Major Projects, OCP and Affordable Housing Policy Development Special Committee -- Mayor Brain introduced the Committee plans, highlighting how the Committee will be looking at policy relating to managing applications for amendments to zoning, planning and procedures, affordable housing issues, secondary suites policies, planning for major projects and other items.
The intention is to integrate all the aspects of the city's planning work to be coherent to each other, as well as to provide a framework for policies to manage what the Mayor described as a plethora of short and long term planning tasks and initiatives.
The City Planner, Mr. Krekic would be the facilitator for the Committee which is expected to be in place for eight to ten weeks, with a plan to have all the findings available for council's adoption at the end of the ten week process.
The Committee is a time limited project, featuring short, mid and long term goals with the ultimate plan to integrate all of the policies into one entity.
Councillor Thorkelson took the lead when it came to questions related to the Mayor's Terms, starting with a number of issues related to her concerns over the affordable housing desires of Council.
She also expressed some confusion over whether it had been designed as a committee of staff, or whether it's one which members of Council would take a more active role in developing policies forward.
The Mayor noted that in the time frame of the Committee work, that there should be room for specific conversations with Council as to what they want to do when it comes to specific concerns.
The City Manager offered up his overview as to how he interprets the committee structure and planning and what would be required of council members as part of the process.
Council accepted the terms for the Committee creation, with council members to advise Mr. Krekic this week as to the nature of their interest in the project.
The first meeting of the Committee will take place in February.
( 2:31:00 -- 2:45:00 ) Terms of Reference for the Community Services/Small Business Advisory Committee -- Councillor Mirau highlighted the focus for his Committee, which is designed to develop a better spirit of collaboration and gain perspectives that aren't normally heard at Council.
Adding that one of the goals of the committee is to make it easier for business to operate and grow in the community. When it comes to the Committee structure, he noted that the Committee would be accepting resumes and the involvement of small business owners, developers, and different people like that who could provide their perspectives.
However, a number of red flags appeared from the Terms for Councillor Joy Thorkelson, who in particular had much to say on the nature of the tasks to be taken on by the Committee and expressed a fair bit of concern over having outside interests such as the Chamber of Commerce involved in advising Council on just about everything, asking what the purpose of the committee was.
To bring the discussion to a close, Council voted to accept a suggestion from Councillor Niesh that would see Mr. Mirau withdraw the current terms of reference and fine tune the presentation to be delivered to Council at the next Council session.
( 2:45:00 -- 2:49:00) Report on the Housing Committee -- The Mayor outlined the progress from the Housing Committee advising that the consultant Shauna Wouters would be presenting a draft report by February. With plans to deliver a draft proposal on housing to the Provincial Government by March.
Mayor Brain also noted that for council the task at the moment could be to identify what lots may be available for development and what those developments should be, suggesting that they focus on one particular development of the City's choosing as to what the City believes is necessary.
( 2:49:00 --3:03:00 ) Reports, Questions and Inquires from Council
Councillor Niesh opened up the Councillor comment portion of the night by raising another item of concern related to the Recreation Department, which he would like to see brought to the attention of the Recreation Commission.
Offering up some background on items related to a local group looking to start up a slow pitch league in the community but having run into some obstacles from the City in finding field access along the way.
Noting that one of the city's ball fields is currently being used as a dog park, adding that access to another field in the Crestview area is no longer apparently allowed for use in that capacity.
Before he got too far into his review however, the Mayor interjected and observed that he didn't believe that raising the issue in the council chamber was the right process that should be used.
Suggesting that the proper approach would be to take the issue to the Recreation Department first, noting that he had the same concern with the Councillor's approach tonight as he had related to the last discussion on the theme of a Gymnastic club in the city.
Those comments resulted in a fairly sharp exchange of points on that theme between the Councillor and Mayor, with Councillor Niesh pointing out that this portion of the evening was called "Concerns and Questions to be raised by council," noting that he was doing just that.
Councillors Cunningham and Thorkelson also joined in on the discussion, with Councillor Cunningham noting that he was still waiting for some dialogue related to the Gymnastics Club issue for the Recreation Commission and that the same process should be used when it comes to Councillor Niesh's latest concerns.
The Mayor returned to his notes on how there is a need to try and resolve the issue before making it a public item and throwing city staff under the bus, while Councillor Thorkeson had concerns about what impact on the morale of workers might be, noting that she did not believe Council members should be disrespecting the work of city workers as part of a public discussion in Council.
She also outlined her thoughts on the proper approach towards these types of issues, noting her belief that going through the City Manager when it comes to dealing with issues related to city staff.
Those made for the final comments on the night, bringing the three hour session to an end
You can access the City Council Review for January 25th, where a number of items regarding the council session, including links to media coverage of it can be found.
As always, our Council Timeline is only a reflection of our observations from the Council session of the night. Be sure to consult with the official minutes from the City, when posted to their website for further review.
Sometime between January 13th and January 18th, a number of tools and equipment from a work site on Seal Cove Circle were stolen and the RCMP would like some help from the public as they move forward into their investigation of the file.
The value of the goods that were taken from a container at the work site in the 2200 block of Seal Cove Circle is estimated at approximately 4,500 dollars.
No further background was provided as to what kind of tools, or the nature of the equipment that was taken as part of the incident.
The RCMP is investigating a theft of tools and equipment in the Seal Cove Circle area earlier this month
Should anyone have seen anything suspicious in the east side neighbourhood between January 13th and 18th, they are asked to contact the Prince Rupert detachment at 250-627-0700.
BC LNG Minister Rich Coleman expects that the CEAA Draft report on the Pacific NorthWest LNG project will be released within weeks
The day is apparently getting close for the much anticipated delivery of the draft report from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, a document which will outline whether the Federal agency will grant conditional approval for the 36 billion dollar Pacific Northwest LNG Terminal at Lelu Island.
Deputy Premier and LNG Minister Rich Coleman has been making the media rounds this week, sharing some thoughts on that draft report process, which he believes could be delivered to the Federal cabinet for consideration by late March.
The LNG Minister continues to remain optimistic on the fate of the proposed development, noting through his interviews that he believes the project is doable and adding that from all indications that he has received from federal contacts, it's a sentiment that he says is shared at the federal level.
LNG Minister Rich Coleman outlined his observations on recent developments on the LNG file in the province this week
It's an issue that he doesn't believe should raise fears in the province, particularly when it comes to the government's hopes for progress on LNG issues and development.
Both Coleman and B. C. environment Minister Mary Polak will be heading to Ottawa to discuss those issues with federal politicians, ready to provide the British Columbia perspective on how those changes may impact on the provinces plans to develop an LNG industry.
Some of Mr. Coleman's discussion points can be reviewed from the articles below:
The Recreation Department will be rolling out their new software system for registrations in February, a highly anticipated addition to the city's information collection system that is hoped to provide savings and improved access to the department's programs.
The topic of the new registration software program was reviewed for council during the November 23rd council session, as part of an overall discussion of Recreation Department finances and capital spending planning by the City's Recreation Director Willa Thorpe.
In addition to a look at some of the financial issues, recreation fee increases and maintenance related notes, Ms. Thorpe offered up a thumbnail sketch of the new software program which is to replace the antiquated system that the City currently makes use of.
Highlighting for council what the new software is expected to provide for the city, tracking trends in recreation use and identify those demographics that make use of the Civic Centre and what participation levels are found at the Recreation Centre.
You can review that November presentation from the City's Video Archive starting at the thirty eight minute mark.
