CVDSA’s Socialist Voter Guide for Town Meeting Day 2024
For City Council…
This election season, Champlain Valley DSA has focused on our two endorsed City Council campaigns: Marek Broderick for Burlington’s Ward 8 and Nick Brownell for Winooski.
As CVDSA members, Marek and Nick have attended countless rallies, pickets, meetings, and canvasses. We know the depth of their commitment to socialist politics and have the utmost confidence that, as elected officials, they will always put workers and tenants first. If either appears on your ballot, please support them.
CVDSA members vote on the chapter’s endorsements based on candidates’ answers to our Electoral Working Group’s questionnaire. We have not endorsed any other candidates for the March election. But that doesn’t mean we’ll be leaving the rest of our ballots blank.
Seven of Burlington’s eight wards host competitive races for City Council. The Vermont Progressive Party, which CVDSA has traditionally supported electorally, has a candidate running in every part of the city (if we include a Prog-endorsed independent in Ward 5). Our own Marek Broderick is one of them.
With the rest, we don’t always see eye-to-eye. This year, several of the candidates’ policy platforms center not merely a strategic retreat from the Progs’ circa-2020 emphasis on the failures and injustices of city policing but, more troublingly, a full about-face, with prominent assertions that public safety demands robustly funded and fully staffed local law enforcement.
In some cases, too, the Progs appear to have capitulated to conservative calls to solve Burlington’s crisis of affordability by slashing property taxes for qualifying homeowners, even as badly needed public services grow more expensive. Broad proposals to sensitize municipal property taxes to income fundamentally represent rejections of the concept of a wealth tax, which leftists tend to favor (and generally wish to expand) in other contexts. All but the very narrowest of such plans would serve to shift the city’s tax burden away from relatively high-wealth retirees – who, in a town where houses don’t come cheap, inevitably comprise the bulk of “low-income” homeowners – and onto working Burlingtonians.
But there are bright spots, as well, among 2024’s batch of Progs, which includes just one incumbent (the redoubtable Gene Bergman). Going against a longtime tendency within the party toward a “small is beautiful” politics, all of them have evinced a commitment to expanding Burlington’s housing stock significantly by allowing denser residential and mixed-use construction. Several of them also have bold, detailed plans for municipal decarbonization.
And the Democrats are worse than ever. For City Council, we recommend Carter Neubieser in Ward 1, Gene Bergman in Ward 2, Joe Kane in Ward 3, Dan Castrigano in Ward 4, Lena Greenberg in Ward 5, Will Anderson in Ward 6, and Lee Morrigan in Ward 7. Most of all, we again urge you to vote for CVDSA’s Marek Broderick in Ward 8.
Winooski, meanwhile, holds nonpartisan elections, but the Progs have endorsed not only Nick Brownell but also incumbent Aurora Hurd for the two open seats on the at-large council. Alongside Nick Brownell, our own enthusiastically endorsed candidate, we recommend Aurora Hurd in Winooski.
For Mayor…
While Winooski doesn’t have a competitive race for mayor (or water commissioner or school trustee, for that matter), the top of Burlington’s ballot, of course, features a four-way contest to replace Democrat Miro Weinberger. Practically, it is a two-person race between State Rep. Emma Mulvaney-Stanak and South District Councilor Joan Shannon.
It’s an easy choice – not because one candidate is very good, but because the other is very, very bad. The post-2020 forces of reaction that have made municipal politics crueler, stupider, and more paranoid in liberal cities across America have found their local culmination in Shannon’s nomination by the Burlington Democrats, who chose her over a relatively moderate Karen Paul, the wealthy South End’s other representative on City Council.
Shannon has spent decades as the right flank of Burlington’s right-wing party. Having avoided the momentary lapse of judgment that led most of her Democratic colleagues to join the Progs in a call for racial justice four years ago, she now stands to benefit. Her coalition of angry homeowners knows that only an increase in state violence and incarceration can wipe away the recent unsightliness in our downtown, and they may soon have their chance.
Hoping to win over Burlington’s political center, Mulvaney-Stanak has taken care not to distinguish herself too dramatically from her opponent. Joan leads by talking about “public safety”; for Emma, the main subject is “community safety.” On other issues, Mulvaney-Stanak’s platform trafficks in assurances that she will “convene stakeholders and experts” to develop appropriate policies, instead of articulating concrete ideas that could be debated seriously.
If Mulvaney-Stanak wins, her defensive posture may persist for the duration of her mayoralty. Still, she is a Prog. She may not have a forward-looking vision of her own for Burlington (let alone a radical one), but if a left-leaning City Council seeks to implement one, she probably won’t veto it. Joan Shannon would.
The stakes are too high for a protest vote, and neither of the two non-competitive independents is a lefty in any case. For Mayor of Burlington, we recommend Emma Mulvaney-Stanak.
Other races and ballot questions…
For Burlington School Commissioner, only Ward 7 features a competitive race. We recommend Monika Ivancic over anti-trans activist William Oetjen.
Ward 7 also has the only competitive race for Inspector of Election. Regrettably, we haven’t learned enough about Linda Belisle or Larry Holt to offer a recommendation. Holt is the incumbent, but Belisle has also served as an inspector in Ward 4.
Ward 8 doesn’t have a candidate for Inspector of Election; we recommend that you write in Jack Sparr. Trust us on this one.
The rest of Burlington’s ballot is conspicuous for what it doesn’t contain. As recently as January, we expected a chance to vote on a new police oversight proposal – a legislatively referred charter change that would have strengthened the city’s existing Police Commission, rather than creating a wholly new disciplinary entity as last year’s somewhat more daring citizens’ initiative sought to do – but City Council decided at the last minute that it wasn’t ready for primetime. In a rare and especially shameful move, the Council also shot down an advisory question that would’ve allowed Burlingtonians to declare their collective opposition to Israeli apartheid, even though residents had gathered more than 1,700 signatures from voters in support of the measure.
Without any popular causes to rally Progressives to the polls, the Democrats may benefit from depressed turnout. We hope voters won’t reward them for their bad behavior.
What remains on the ballot is a trio of articles containing a school budget, a public safety tax rate increase, and a proposal to increase the bonding authority of the Burlington Electric Department.
We recommend a yes on Question 1. Last year, Burlingtonians approved the construction of a new high school, and now it’s time to start paying for it. People may not like it – especially at the very moment when Vermonters have to fill in the gap left by the end of the federal COVID-19 dollars that temporarily propped up our state education fund – but that’s how it works.
We recommend a no on Question 2. Because the police and fire tax pays only for a fraction of our police and fire budgets (with most of the rest coming out of the city’s general fund), a rate increase could, theoretically, serve as a politically expedient way to expand Burlington’s overall resources, since voters already rejected an increase to the general city rate two years ago. In reality, the money will go to Chief Murad’s typically dysfunctional, sometimes barbarous, and (thanks in part to City Council) always unaccountable Burlington Police Department, which already spends more than it ever has before. With a few extra million, they’ll still probably claim to have been defunded when residents call for help.
We recommend a yes on Question 3. We want our municipal electric utility to have access to the capital it needs to make good investments. BED hasn’t yet put forward a plan for any major new projects; a separate nonprofit will issue debt to pay for the controversial “district energy” pipeline from the McNeil plant, irrespective of BED’s bonding authority. In the immediate term, approving this ballot question will serve to improve BED’s credit rating.
Winooski’s ballot questions don’t offer much to get excited (or upset) about, either. Due to procedural missteps by the city, a second vote on Just Cause Eviction, which voters approved last year, still needs to happen before it can progress to the state legislature, but the responsibility for correcting 2023’s administrative error lies in the hands of the same people who committed it in the first place, and apparently, it’ll have to wait.
Starting at the top, 2024’s Winooski articles ask voters to approve the municipal budget, to approve the spending of city revenue derived from sources other than property taxes, to approve the spending of leftover funds from an old water infrastructure bond, to authorize a new $4.6 million bond to help reconstruct the Burlington-Winooski Bridge, and (this time on behalf of the Champlain Water District) to approve the spending of leftover funds from yet another old water infrastructure bond.
In other words, should Winooski residents allow their city government to continue to perform normal governmental functions? We recommend voting yes on all articles in Winooski.
Advocates for pedestrians and cyclists have rightly called the proposed design for the new Burlington-Winooski Bridge outdated and car-centric, and Winooski officials continue to hold out hope that additional contributions from state or federal sources will reduce the city’s prospective share of the project’s final cost. Approving Article 7 won’t foreclose these discussions. Ultimately, the century-old bridge must go.
On a separate ballot, Vermonters can vote in the Democrats’ presidential primary. We’d advise voting symbolically for a left-wing challenger if Biden faced one, but we don’t think Cenk Uygur or the defunct campaign of Marianne Williamson counts. CVDSA offers no recommendation. While Burlingtonians receive municipal ballots automatically by mail, they must request presidential primary ballots online or in person.
Town Meeting Day is March 5. Vermont offers same-day voting registration. Click for information about voting in Burlington or Winooski.
Resolution: For an Anti-Zionist Salt Lake DSA
Salt Lake DSA is proud to announce that at our January 2024 chapter meeting, we unanimously passed a resolution that reinforces Salt Lake DSA as an Anti-Zionist organization in principle and in practice. This resolution commits Salt Lake DSA to Anti-Zionism as a part of our socialist understanding of anti-colonialism, anti-imperialism, and anti-racism. It defines the Anti-Zionist expectations of our membership and endorsed candidates, political education for our membership, community, and candidates in order to meet those expectations, and follow-on procedures for failures thereof.
The resolution is a declaration of steadfast and ongoing solidarity, and will strengthen our organizing for a just future here in Utah and world-wide. We are part of a wave of DSA chapters, including Houston DSA, Inland Empire DSA, and DSA SF, passing resolutions that fully commit us to Anti-Zionism and place ourselves on the side of the Palestinian liberation struggle.
Palestine’s liberation is our liberation.
Resolution: For an Anti-Zionist Salt Lake DSA in both Principle and Practice
Author: Jack B
Co-signers: Emily R, Jelly M, Dayne G, Leigh F, Michael V
Passed unanimously at the January General Body Meeting, January 29, 2024Whereas:
- In line with Convention Resolutions #4 and #62 from 2019, the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is an anti-imperialist organization;
- In line with Convention Resolution #50 from 2019, the DSA is an anti-colonialist organization committed to advancing decolonization projects;
- In line with Convention Resolutions #41 and #45 from 2017 and Resolutions #4 and #31 from 2021, the DSA is an anti-racist organization;
- In line with Convention Resolutions #7&8 from 2017 and Resolution #35 from 2019, DSA National has publicly declared on numerous occasions in recent years that it “unapologetically stands in solidarity with Palestinian people everywhere;”
- Zionism – as popularized by Theodore Herzl and explicitly described by him as “something colonial,” meant to be “a wall of Europe against Asia… an outpost of [Western] civilization against [Eastern] barbarism” – is and has always been a racist, imperialist, settler-colonial project that has resulted in the ongoing death, displacement, and dehumanization of Palestinians everywhere (i.e., in Palestine and in diaspora around the world);
- The establishment of a Jewish ethnostate in Palestine (i.e., the so-called “state of Israel”) and its maintenance via ongoing and illegal occupation, apartheid and ethnic cleansing represent the culmination of Zionists’ century-long colonization of Palestine;
- Antithetical to the DSA’s contemporary principles and policies, DSA’s founding merger was heavily predicated on ensuring that the DSA would uphold DSOC’s position of supporting continued American aid for Israel’s Zionist settler-colonial project, as explicitly noted in our organization’s founding merger documents (e.g., Points of Political Unity) and by Michael Harrington himself in his autobiography;
- Antithetical to the DSA’s contemporary principles and policies, a number of DSA endorsed electeds (e.g., Jamaal Bowman & Nithya Raman) have consistently demonstrated a commitment to Zionism through their public opposition to BDS and/or support for legislation that harms Palestinians everywhere (e.g., public support for and votes in favor of U.S. financial aid to Israeli military, which forcefully advances the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Palestine through systematic tactics of abuse, forcible displacement, and murder of Palestinians; governmental adoption of definitions of antisemitism that conflate anti-Zionism and antisemitism, leading to the suppression of speech of Palestinians and those in solidarity with them);
- The DSA’s historic and contemporary association with and enablement of Zionism has jeopardized DSA rank-and-file membership’s confidence in the integrity of DSA’s overall politics, as well as our organization’s working relationships with major Palestinian-led grassroots organizations across North America;
- DSA membership has overwhelmingly denounced Zionism through its stated principles and convention mandates since 2017 but has yet to articulate these newfound principles into a more coherent praxis
- The resolution “Make DSA an Anti-Zionist Organization in Principle and Praxis” (MSR #12), failed to be heard or deliberated on at the 2023 National Convention, and there is an urgent need to address this on a chapter level;
- In failing to pass an Anti-Zionist resolution in the spirit of MSR #12, DSA is not a safe space for Palestinians and those who organize for Palestinian liberation, as evidenced by the digital and physical threats against Palestine organizers at the 2023 convention;
Therefore, be it resolved:
- The Salt Lake DSA chapter denounces the organization’s Zionist roots and reaffirms its commitment to being an anti-racist, anti-imperialist organization by explicitly committing to being an anti-Zionist chapter– in both principle and praxis;
- Salt Lake DSA once again reaffirms our organizations commitments to Palestinian liberation and the broad, international BDS movement by conveying our expectation that all of Salt Lake DSA’s endorsed candidates hold true to the following basic commitments:
- Publicly support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement;
- Refrain from any and all affiliation with the Israeli government or Zionist lobby groups, such as, but not limited to, AIPAC, J Street, or Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI), including participating in political junkets or any event sponsored by these entities;
- Pledge to oppose legislation that harms Palestinians, such as…
- Any official adoption of a redefinition of antisemitism to include opposition to Israel’s policies or legal system, or support for BDS (e.g., IHRA definition of antisemitism);
- Legislative and executive efforts to penalize individuals, universities and entities that boycott Israel;
- Legislative and executive efforts to send any military or economic resources to Israel;
- Pledge to support legislation that supports Palestinian liberation, such as…
- Legislative and executive efforts to end Israeli apartheid and ethnic cleansing against Palestinians and promote Palestinians’ rights to return to and live freely on the land (e.g., H.R. 2590);
- Condemnation of Israeli apartheid and colonial practices (e.g., H.Res. 751);
- Attempts to end the spending of U.S. tax dollars on Israel and/or sanction Israel until it ceases its practices of apartheid and colonialism;
- Our local chapter’s candidate questionnaires will continue to include a question that inquires about the candidate’s position on BDS;
- Potential candidates who cannot commit to the aforementioned basic expectations will be disqualified from endorsement by the Salt Lake DSA at every level;
- The Salt Lake DSA will provide, in collaboration with trusted Palestine Solidarity movement partners in the grassroots (e.g., Palestinian Solidarity Association of Utah) and the DSA International Committee, will provide all endorsed candidates with anti-Zionist educational materials, 1-to-1 training opportunities and ongoing, open-door counsel as needed;
- Upon receiving fair and ample opportunity for education about the Palestinian struggle for liberation, endorsed candidates who do not commit to the aforementioned basic expectations will have their Salt Lake DSA endorsements swiftly revoked;
- Salt Lake DSA members – regardless of endorsement status – who are credibly shown to:
- Have consistently and publicly opposed BDS and Palestine (e.g., denouncing the BDS movement in public interviews; writing public op-eds denouncing the BDS movement; drafting and voting in favor of legislation that suppresses BDS, such as legislation that suppresses speech rights around the right to freely criticize Zionism/Israel and/or the right to boycott), even after receiving fair and ample opportunity for education about the Palestinian struggle for liberation,
- Be currently affiliated with the Israeli government or any Zionist lobby group(s) such as, but not limited to, AIPAC, J Street, or Democratic Majority for Israel (DMFI), or
- Have provided material aid to Israel (e.g., Congresspeople voting to provide Israel with material aid; gave direct financial donations of any kind to Israel and/or settler NGOs who carry out the mission of Israeli settlement and Palestinian dispossession/displacement, such as the Jewish National Fund, the Israel Land Fund, the Hebron Fund, and Regavim)
- Will be considered in substantial disagreement with DSA’s principles and policies, and thus, the chapter will initiate the expulsion process in line with Article 1, Section 3 of the national DSA Bylaws;
- Members expelled on these grounds may be reconsidered for membership reinstatement once per year provided they write a statement to chapter membership that 1.) demonstrates a basic understanding of Palestinian issues and Zionism and 2.) apologizes for past anti-solidaristic behaviors with a commitment to putting their new anti-Zionist principles into practice;
- Membership reinstatement of reformed Zionists will require recommendation for reinstatement by their local chapter, followed by a majority vote in favor of reinstatement by the National Political Committee, as per the national Bylaws.
The post Resolution: For an Anti-Zionist Salt Lake DSA first appeared on Salt Lake DSA.
March 5, 2024 Voter Guide
This is the March, 2024 Democratic Primary San Antonio Democratic Socialists of America (SADSA) Voters Guide. There are no SADSA endorsed candidates on the ballot this cycle.
All candidates named in this guide are recommended, however, San Antonio DSA did not actively campaign on their behalf. Candidates and propositions must seek the endorsement of SADSA, as our general membership votes on the decision to endorse. Several community members have reached out to SADSA for a voter guide, so we created one. It is by no means expansive and does not cover every race in our area, but we hope this can help inform your decisions if you’re looking to a socialist organization for electoral advice.
We know during a presidential year, much of the attention focuses on the top of the ticket, but local and state races arguably have just as much impact on our daily lives. None of the presidential candidates nor parties represent the interests of working people. Unfortunately for many state and local voters, neither do the candidates running for those positions. If a candidate is in a solid district, running unopposed,, we opted to not recommend.
Our struggles go beyond the ballot box, but it is a site of struggle that we cannot withdraw from or ignore. We can take it back if we fight together. Join San Antonio DSA.
If you have any questions or comments, please do not email SanAntonioDSA@gmail.com.
You can vote at any voting location in Bexar County. Go to the Bexar Co. Elections Department website to find voting locations, hours, your individual sample ballot, and more.
Becoming More Powerful than the Boss with Claire Valdez
Tonight, we’re talking to Claire Valdez, a NYC-DSA endorsed candidate for Assembly District 37 in Queens about what being endorsed by NYC-DSA and UAW Region 9A means to her, how she plans to bring her union organizing experience of becoming ‘more powerful than the boss’ to the halls of power in Albany and much more.
There are currently 8 socialists endorsed by NYC-DSA serving in Albany in the Senate and Assembly. If electoral organizers get their way- that number could be 11 next year - the largest socialist block ever elected in New York.
NYC-DSA has voted to endorse three new-insurgent candidates this year- Claire in Queens, Eon Huntley in Brooklyn and Jonathan Soto in the Bronx.
As we do every year, we will talk to all of the new-dsa endorsed candidates here on Revolutions Per Minute and tonight is the first in that series of interviews with the NYC-DSA’s 2024 slate. So stick around to hear from Claire, a union organizer running for Assembly District 37 in Queens - stretching from Long Island City, Sunnyside and Maspeth to Ridgewood.
To learn more visit https://claireforqueens.com/ and to sign up for a canvassing shift https://claireforqueens.com/events/
Nitehawk Workers Union
Should the DC left fear ranked choice voting or semi-open primaries?
DSA's National Campaign for Trans Rights & Bodily Autonomy
This past weekend, DSA held their inaugural kickoff for their new nationwide campaign for Trans Rights & Bodily Autonomy. Spearheaded by the Trans Rights and Bodily Autonomy Campaign Commission, DSA will mobilize the organization’s tens of thousands of members across 150+ chapters across the country, not only to combat the advances of the far-right and their systematic attempt at every level of government to remove trans people from public life & restrict access to abortion, but also to advance a positive vision of queer liberation that protects queer spaces, our rights as workers, students & educators, and as human beings. Tonight, we will hear from Genevieve, joining us from Ithaca, NY and one of the leaders of this organization-wide project, to break down all the pieces of this ambitious campaign, how DSA will rise to fight the far-right, and why the struggle for trans rights & bodily autonomy is a struggle for the whole working class.
Join DSA's Trans Rights & Bodily Autonomy Campaign Commission: https://airtable.com/appxkhakxWCUXVVqO/pag9jCfy3jpsn74do/form
Support Tech Guild Workers organizing for trans rights at The New York Times:
https://actionnetwork.org/petitions/nyt-respect-trans-workers
Organizations Call on Land Bank to Commit to Affordable Housing
Public land should be used for the public good.
On January 25th, 2024, five local organizations sent a letter to the Columbus Land Bank making this demand and asking it to commit to reserving all its properties suitable for residential development for projects that are 100% and permanently affordable. The Columbus Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America authored that letter because we believe a just future depends on our public institutions committing to bold action in order to provide housing for all.
The Columbus Land Bank is the government body responsible for acquiring land using public funds and making it available for housing. Along with its partner organization the Franklin County Land Bank, it has the potential to address one of the primary obstacles to the construction of affordable housing: the high cost of land. In recognition of this potential, Mayor Andrew Ginther announced that his administration would allocate 25% of 2022’s $200 million affordable housing bond to the land banks.
This is welcome news, but only if the Columbus Land Bank takes steps to avoid the developer-friendly policies that have plagued much of the rest of the City’s housing strategy. For example, Ginther and City Council recently decided to expand their controversial residential tax abatement program to the entire city. Under this program, developers are eligible to receive a 15-year 100% property tax break in exchange for pricing 20% of their units at below-market rents for 15 years–or by buying their way out of the affordability requirement entirely. Aware that many Columbus residents are opposed to this program, City Council also voted to award $75,000 to a marketing firm to educate the public about the “benefits” of tax abatements.
The Columbus Land Bank has sometimes operated as though its primary purpose is to redistribute cheap public land to developers. According to public sale records, in one instance, the Land Bank has sold public land for as little as $5,700 to a private developer who resold it for $490,000 after building a single-family home on it. This is unacceptable in a county where at least 52,000 households are severely burdened by housing costs and many others struggle to make rent or pay property taxes. At a time when City leaders are bending over backwards to grant additional tax breaks and other financial incentives to developers, reserving public land exclusively for projects that benefit the public is more important than ever.
Publicly-owned land is one of the most valuable assets the City has at its disposal to address the housing crisis. Selling off this land at a pittance to private developers to build expensive single-family homes is not only a poor policy choice but also morally indefensible. We are sick and tired of the City prioritizing the financial interests of wealthy developers over the wellbeing of its residents. That is why we are calling on the Columbus Land Bank to live up to its institutional purpose and use public lands in a way that actually serves the public.
Letter sent to the Columbus Land Bank on January 25, 2024
To the Columbus Land Bank,
The signatories to this letter are organizations committed to the principle that every member of our community deserves to live in truly and permanently affordable housing. As such, we broadly support the Columbus Land Bank’s mission to acquire land and make it available for housing. High land prices are one of the primary barriers to the construction of affordable housing. By purchasing land using public funds, the Land Bank has the ability to bring down housing costs and facilitate the creation of additional affordable housing. Unfortunately, the Land Bank has not always operated in this fashion.
Over the years, the Land Bank has sold many of its properties at a steep discount to for-profit developers. In some cases, these for-profit developers have built single-family homes on the properties, while in others, they have merely rehabbed existing ones. In all cases, they have benefited financially by buying public land on the cheap and selling it at market rates. Developers have resold some former Land Bank properties for over $400,000, many in historically-deprived neighborhoods. These unaffordable single-family developments make it harder to build the dense housing the city needs and instead incentivize landlords to raise rents.
As organizations committed to housing justice, we believe that publicly-owned land should be used exclusively to further the public good. Providing low-cost land to for-profit developers does not advance a public aim. Providing low-cost land for the construction of affordable housing does. That is why we are calling on you to commit to reserving all Land Bank properties suitable for residential development for projects that are permanently and 100% affordable.
You recently announced your intention to reserve most of your inventory for affordable housing projects going forward. This is welcome news, but it does not go far enough. The Land Bank has a vital role to play in creating and preserving affordable housing in Columbus. The Land Bank should join us, and all concerned Columbus residents, to help truly address the housing crisis.
Columbus Democratic Socialists of America
Central Ohio Food Not Bombs
First Collective
Heer to Serve
People’s Justice Project
Remembering the Young Lords: The Legacy of Pablo Yoruba Guzman
This episode of Revolutions Per Minute explores the life and legacy of Pablo Yoruba Guzman, who co-founded the New York chapter of the Young Lords, and later became a prominent television reporter on local news channels in the city. We are joined by Mickey Melendez, a fellow Young Lord, to discuss the group's occupations of the First People’s Church in Harlem and Lincoln Hospital in the South Bronx. We will also hear from New York City Council Member Charles Baron, the organizer Denise Oliver-Velez and CUNY scholar Johanna Fernandez on the legacy of the group.