So what would they do?

Yeah, these are all, I mean, it's helpful, I think, for voters just to think of these as all answering the same question in different ways.

So Prop 40 is vote on that if you like the wealth tax, vote no if you don't.

And Prop 41 and Prop 42 are what folks are calling countermeasures to Prop 40.

So essentially they would cancel out Prop 40.

And they do that in different ways that are a little bit technical.

Prop 41 would require...

Do you know how how have they fared with the wealth tax?

But as you said, there's a lot else in there, you know, Given that the sort of YIMBY movement has sort of taken a neutral position on it, is there a concern being articulated by some that housing isn't the real reason that this is being pushed?

Well, yeah, I mean, it's an interesting point.

It does seem like Cal Chamber has come to the determination that there is a lot of political sympathy right now, political momentum behind removing some of the restrictions, the regulatory restrictions on housing development in particular.

And so they're kind of running with that.

And again, like this would uncork a lot of, presumably, potentially uncork a lot of the construction of a lot of greenfield development, which a lot of housing developers are excited about.

But there is a bit of an awkward tension between the EMB movement in general and the arguments being made in favor of this development.

this measure.

Assuming these three things pass, what do you see as being sort of the next frontier of the fight for housing in Sacramento? And I'll say that noting that one of the biggest advocates for swinging big on housing, Scott Wiener, is not going to be there next year.

Tell us what those plans actually look like.

Yeah, that's right.

These are plans that are required by the state law.

The state's housing department, HCD, comes up with a sort of a formula for determining how many new homes broken down by affordability level are required of each region.

And then the regions take these and sort of break them up for each city.

And so at the end of the day, Each city is given sort of an eight-year window to plan for its designated number of homes.

And this is supposed to represent basically the state's best guess of what the state needs to both accommodate a growing population.

Can you talk about some of the reforms in state law that have been made to this process of allocating different numbers of how many housing units each region needs to plan for? And, you know, what was the what was the problem with the process that was seen before? And how did those legislation how did those laws change the process?