In preparation for the June 15 mayoral runoff election, our news team recently interviewed both Lubbock mayoral candidates, former District 3 city council representative Mark McBrayer and former District 4 city council representative Steve Massengale, about topics important to Lubbock voters.
You can find the video of the interview and full transcript below:
To start out, tell us a bit about yourself.
Massengale:
I’m Steve Massengale. I grew up here in Lubbock and went to school at Monterey [High School], graduate of Texas Tech. Started my small businesses here that I still have. I’m a retailer here, selling Texas Tech merchandise for one of my businesses and I own another business called Advanced Graphics.
I got started working in the community right out of college, with some work with Texas Tech as they transitioned from the Southwest Conference to the Big 12. So, I kind of cut my teeth there and learned a lot about working with the community.
I served on the schoolbard for eight years, really earned a great appreciation for the public school system during that time, and since 2016 I’ve been on the city council for the past eight years.
McBrayer:
I’m Mark McBrayer, longtime resident of Lubbock. I’ve lived here since I was a kid, and my wife and I both grew up here and went to school here, to Texas Tech.
My kids went to Texas Tech. My daughter is a dentist here in town. My son and his wife are teachers and my son and his wife have my two granddaughters. So, Lubbock is a lot of my past and it’s also a big part of my future. That’s why I’m running for mayor, because I love Lubbock and I want it to be a great place for my grandchildren to grow up.
I’m a practicing attorney, but I’m not taking on any new clients. I’m working through the clients I’ve got. Hopefully, I’ll be finished with all the business I have with them by the end of the years so I can be committed full-time to being the Mayor of Lubbock.
Local government responsiveness and transparency with citizens have been popular topics this election season. What steps are you willing to take as a leader in city government to be more transparent with the people of Lubbock?
McBrayer:
Oh, I think one of the things that has come up, I've been on the council for two years, and what I have seen several times, is we would make a decision as a council, and we have a lot of information given to us by people at City Hall to help us make a decision. And so we make that decision kind of in a vacuum of the information we're given by City Hall. And oftentimes that information then doesn't percolate out to the citizens at large till after we've made a decision, and then they come back, sometimes in big numbers, to tell us, you know, ‘you got that one all wrong.’ The solution to that is to make sure citizens know well in advance on issues that will affect them, what we're planning to do, why we're doing it, and get the response from them before we actually make our decision. Because, I mean, I'm never one. I've never been afraid to admit if we make a mistake. My dad always said, 'If you mess up, fess up.' And so that's fine, but I'd rather us have the input from the citizens, have them know what we're doing. And so I think that we can do a better job of communicating. A lot of that has to do with the media we have here in town, making sure the message goes out to them so that they can spread it to the citizens and the voters and the taxpayers, and they know what's coming up. But I do hope to improve that message and be on the front end of it, rather than reacting on the back end, when 100 people come to the city council and go, ‘why did you do this?’
Massengale:
You know, transparency is, I think, something that you never achieve, although you're working toward it all the time. I think it's a challenge for all levels of government. As mayor, I will make sure that we over-communicate. I'd like to see more town hall meetings… I'd like to see the mayor do some town hall meetings. I'd also like to see more work sessions. I think work sessions bring attention to certain topics that deserve it, and just to get some good dialog so that we make good decisions on the council.
Do you believe that vouchers could be a benefit to the state education system?
Would you work to protect the role of public educators in Lubbock?
Massengale:
Well, as I mentioned earlier, I spent quite a bit of time in public education. The voucher system has got to be designed in a way that does not impact public schools as we know it today. They can’t be done at their expense. And so as our state legislature works through that, I hope that they keep that in mind. It's a big decision, and at the end of the day, I support public schools. I support those educators that work day in and day out to educate our children. I'm a product of public school, and I'm proud of that, and I think as a community, we need to make sure they're protected.
McBrayer:
Well, of course, the schools are not really part of the city government, that’s your school board. And I personally am not opposed to vouchers. I would rather them be done on a small scale to see how the results are. I very much believe in the public school system. My wife was a public school teacher for 29 years. My son and his wife are both school teachers in the public school system, we actually have good public schools here in Lubbock. I don't actually think the voucher system is going to change a whole lot about the situation we have here in Lubbock, it may in other cities. My concern, always, is not where you have a good school district like we have in Lubbock, but in a city where you have really a poorly performing school district to give people the option to have another choice. And you know, the public has an interest in having- and the state has an interest in having- an educated public, but I don't know that it's necessarily the monopoly of the state to educate students. I believe options are good. I want to make sure that our public school system — which fulfills a very important need — is taken care of, but that really is more of a state issue and a school board issue than a City issue, but that's my personal opinion about that.
Now that a police chief has been chosen, how do you feel about his background, credibility, and ability to find solutions to Lubbock’s crime problems?
McBrayer:
“In my campaign, that's been my number one issue. The issue I brought up first is the crime situation. A lot of the crime in Lubbock is gang and drug related, and so the goal was to find a police chief who has experience in dealing with that particular kind of crime. And I think in chief Herman, that we found is someone who does have that experience and has that record.
He comes from a city that is in many ways similar to Lubbock, and he comes with a good portfolio. One thing I liked about him, you know, we read through the resumes of all of these four people that our city manager brought to us, his answers were the shortest and most direct of all of them. That tells me a little bit about him: he wants to get to the point, he wants to get results, and that's what we need. I need someone here who hits the ground running and can motivate our police force and lead our police force to get control of the gang and drug related problem that we have here.
And then the other part of that, of course, is making sure that our police officers are paid enough so that we keep them here after we hire them, train them. We don't want to lose them to other cities where they can make more money. So I'm happy to have the endorsement of the police association because they believe I understand what a critical part they are in solving that drug and crime related problem.
Massengale:
I'm pleased with the city manager's selection for police chief. Chief Herman will start on June 3. I think everybody's excited to have him on the job. You know, as I look to Chief Herman as he does his job, I expect a couple things, and one is to hold criminals accountable. I have been around the community enough, especially in the campaign, to know that people are frustrated with crime.
Second, I hope he works hard to lead our officers, the men and women that work at Lubbock Police Department and gain their trust, because I think that's key. I think holding criminals accountable effectively and leading our officers go hand in hand. And so if there's good morale, I think we'll see good work done on our streets.
I would just add to that, that crime is on the mind of a lot of citizens. Crimes in neighborhoods and crimes in businesses are very frustrating, and a lot of our crime that we see here in Lubbock is gang and drug related. And so I just look forward to his work in those areas, the expertise he's brought from Midland, and look forward to seeing our continued decrease in some of our crime rates.
Both candidates have talked about supporting police. Programs have been implemented by the city, new facilities have been built, and crime in Lubbock went down from 2022 to 2023.
Along with police support, what role does the city play in preventing crimes?
Massengale:
Well, the community policing facility has had an impact. I played a huge role in that, and I’m glad to see that it’s making a difference. You know, from a policy perspective, I think the City Council could look at a couple of things that would help reinforce the expectation we have with the city manager and the police chief. As mayor, if I'm elected mayor, I would consider looking at some of those things.
McBrayer:
Well, you know, our job is to make sure that we do have enough police officers on patrol. And gang and drug related crimes are different than a lot of others. Are not the kind of random, you know, domestic violence and things like that that you might have. You can't target that, but you do know where the gangs are and how they're operating, who are associated with them. It's one of those things that if you have a very coordinated effort, coordinated between the city, county and federal agents, you can get a control of that problem. And we have to get control of it. The rates did seem to go down from ‘22 to 2023 but it seems like some of those rates are going back up. I know the murder rate is going up this year. I mean, I hear the sirens every night, it seems like and you wake up the next morning and there's a shooting, drive-by shooting, or there's a murder. I think people understand that we've got a problem, and it's not just located in any particular area. It spreads all over our city.
According to Lubbock Police, 698 guns were reported stolen in the city last year. 286 of them were stolen from vehicles.
LPD has made efforts to decrease that number by reminding citizens not to leave their guns in their cars.
If you’re elected mayor, are there ways the city could support LPD’s efforts to encourage safe gun ownership in Lubbock?
McBrayer:
Access to guns is a big problem. And obviously I am a big supporter of the Second Amendment. I believe people need to have rights to have their weapons to protect themselves. Because, as people used to say, you know, when you got an immediate problem, the police are just minutes away. You know, sometimes you have to be able to protect yourself. The police are important, but you need to be able to defend yourself. So I'm a supporter of that, but people need to be responsible. I don't know if there's even a way to pass an ordinance for a ticket or citation in some way for having an unlocked car with a gun in it.
It's a problem. I'm for responsible gun ownership, and that's not responsible to leave your gun in your vehicle unlocked. But part of it is education, a large part of it is just educating people to that. So we want to keep guns out of the hands of people who aren't law abiding citizens. That's for sure.
Massengale:
Sure, PR. Continued PR on this. I mean, I had a neighbor in my own neighborhood that their vehicle got broken into, and their firearm was visible. It's important to take your firearms out of your vehicle, you can't give them a reason to break in. But I think PR is important. As mayor, I'd like to see some of these neighborhood watch groups reinvigorated, that work hand in hand with our police, and I think that could have some effect on this.
As mayor, what steps would you take to ensure effective and sustainable water management for Lubbock as it shifts focus from well fields to surface water sources like Lake Alan Henry and the Canyon Lake System?
Massengale:
The people that have come before me have done a great job of water in Lubbock. Lubbock is one of the largest semi-arid cities in the United States that has the water supply we do. Right now our water comes from three sources, the Bailey County well fields, Roberts County well fields and Lake Alan Henry; all have been very successful water supplies.
We've always looked at our water supply at 100-year increments in Lubbock, and I think that's important to know, and the work we've done on Lake 7 will complement that. And so, as mayor, I would work to make sure Lake 7 is built, let and make sure it effectively serves the rate payers of Lubbock the way it's supposed to, so that we always have plenty of water.
McBrayer:
We just concluded, you know, the purchase of the land for our lake seven, which I'm so excited about. That's not just going to be good for our water situation, but it's going to be an incredible recreational resource for Lubbock, which is something that we need here, I think, an opportunity for that kind of recreation. Of course, our new Veterans Cemetery is going to be right out there on the edge of it too. It's going to be a beautiful location for that.
We have a good 100 year water plan. Some people don't know that our water conservation program here in Lubbock has been very effective. If you compare our water usage per family or household to Amarillo’s, for example, we are way ahead of them on having a much lower use of water. So we have a fairly effective program to encourage people to continue, as I did a couple years ago, take half of my front lawn and Zero Escape half of it, you know, to cut down on the water that I use.
We want to encourage people to continue to do that, but we do have a good 100 year water supply. Bringing Lake 7 online is going to be a great benefit to us, but it's probably the most critical long term problem that most people don't think about here in the city, but we have to because Lubbock is a growing city, and we have to be able to provide a water resource for the people. But we're on top of it.
Would you consider supporting a quality-of-life bond for improvements like parks, pools, walkability, etc. ?
McBrayer:
I think we could probably put something together like that. I don't know that this is the right time to do it, just now. People are still coming out of some pretty tough economic times. We have spent a lot of ARPA money, which is federal money that came in through the federal government programs related to covid that pushed a lot of money into our budget that we were able to use to do a lot of things, some of which are quality of life– splash pads, for instance. And we've just finished remodeling and fixing to open a new health center here.
So a lot of those things we've been able to do with federal money. But as far as tax money from our local citizens, from sales taxes and property taxes until things improve, I don't want to put something out there and have it fail because the citizens are going ‘well. I just— I don't want to bear that additional tax increase.’ I think if we can keep their taxes, the regular taxes they pay, low for an extended period of time until the economy picks up again, we can, if we come to them with a well-designed bond program, possibly get that passed. I think that's the key to it.
We've had two road bonds here, one that failed, and then a year later we came back. Because it was, well, first of all, is implemented by a Citizens Committee, and it was more well thought out. And when we came back to the citizens, and it presented that need to a second time, even with more money, they approved it. So people are not against making a choice to raise the taxes on themselves, if they know that is for something very particular, and they understand what it is and where the money is and where the money is going to be used, and how it's going to benefit them, but I think you need to wait for the timing is very important in that but I'm certainly not against that.
Quality of life is important. It's important for our neighborhoods. And people live in neighborhoods and they want their parks and the amenities they have in their neighborhoods to make that a pleasant place to live, keeps their home values up, gives their kids a great place to go out and enjoy themselves. And so that's important, very important.
Massengale:
A quality of life bond would be something that you'd have to work closely with the community on. You'd have to make sure there was good support and lots of buy-in before you looked at something like that.
What most often comes up — I may jump ahead, but I'm going to go and say it — is pools. I think this is a quality of life issue. We're doing this interview in a week that would have been the first week that normally, that city pools would be open, and what I hear from citizens is that pools are a quality of life issue that they want to see. I'm prepared to have that discussion with the community as mayor and determine what those facilities look like in the future.
It's likely that if the community does want something like that, that it would require one of those bonds that you're referring to quality of life, and it would have a tax impact. But if that's what we want as a community, then I, as mayor, I'd be prepared to lead us to that point.
Question for Massengale:
In a recent debate, when asked whether you believe Lubbock’s current public policies are keeping us safe, you said the first step was defeating Proposition A.
What part of beating Proposition A illustrated a safer public policy for Lubbock?
Massengale:
I think it's just controlling the decriminalization of cannabis. In my opinion, that's a slippery slope. I think there was a lot of confusion around that. I think some people thought it was legalization, which I don't support either, but you don't have to look at it very long to connect that to criminal activity and gang activity. And so my position was Prop A should have been defeated, and I think that contributes to the public safety of our community.
Question for McBrayer:
You have said that increasing officer morale and retention is a step to reducing crime in Lubbock.
What can you do as a mayor to increase officer morale and retention.
McBrayer:
Well, I think it starts with leadership. We've got good leadership, and that will improve the morale in our forces, and then knowing that they have the backing of their city council does improve that as well.
They, you know, three years ago, they had mounted a campaign to get their pay raise out of a city council, before I was on it. They'd fallen way behind in their their pay, and they weren't getting–we're raising taxes all along, that council was raising people's taxes– but the police officers weren't getting the benefit of that, and they'd fallen far behind. So they had to go out and put their money together and walk the streets and get a petition signed to bring it to the council to force a raise, to get a raise, and still, even after they got that raise, they were still pretty far behind. But they shouldn't have to do that.
That does affect your morale, when it seems like your city council really doesn't understand how critical and how important they are. I mean, that is the most important thing a city does, and if you're not doing it well, you see the evidence of it quickly. And we don't want Lubbock to descend into that kind of a crime ridden situation that some other cities get into, and the police are the key to it.
So I think if they know they have the support of the council, I certainly am going to support them. I want to get them up to where their pay is in the top 10 [in Texas], because we're one of the top 10 largest cities in Texas. We should be there with their pay so we don't lose them to Midland and Abilene, where they can go make a whole lot more money at the moment.
Question for Massengale:
You have referred to yourself as “pro-growth”.
Do you agree with the recent council decision regarding student housing in South Overton?
Massengale:
I do. I think we’ve talked about this a lot on the campaign trail, so it's no secret where I stood on this. I voted for this the prior time it came up in the city council.
This particular project is positioned to be on what's actually vacant land today, and I believe that these projects can be done in a way that's compatible with the neighborhood. They're needed to support the growth of Texas Tech. That's a part of our community that's very walkable, and that project lends itself to that. But again, I think those projects can be done in a way that takes in consideration of the neighbors and the neighboring churches and businesses.
Follow-up question for Massengale:
The student housing projects that are currently in North Overton are aging.
How can the city hold these projects more accountable so that they don't fall into disrepair?
Massengale:
I'm not so sure that's the city's role, but maybe the market's role. You know, if someone's not taking care of their business over there, then maybe someone will go do business somewhere else.
A project like [South Overton] will also change the game a little bit for the market over there. So I think we're going to see, as Texas Tech continues to grow, I think we'll see more and more projects similar to this to accommodate the housing needs of our university.
Question for McBrayer:
You have taken a stance against disrupting or neglecting historical neighborhoods.
Do you agree with the recent council decision regarding student housing in South Overton?
McBrayer:
Well, they asked everybody there to stand up who was against it. I, of course, stood up because I was against it. You know, we had four votes against it the first time it came up. We only had one vote against it the second time. I’ve got to give credit to those people for their timing. They’re coming back before the council when I wasn’t there and when Latrelle [Joy] wasn’t there, two of the votes against it.
They had to have six votes this time to get it done because more than 20% of the property owners had opposed it, but they were able to put those six votes together.
I still was against it, but I will tell you this, if it's going to happen, the guy who's doing it, David Pierce, is going to do a good job with it. I like him. It was a hard vote for me to vote against it, because …I think he loves Lubbock. He loves Tech. I went and visited his facilities in College Station. They're incredible facilities. So I told him afterwards, I said, well, the vote didn't go the way I wanted it to, but given that fact, I said, I'm happy that you're the one that's doing it, and I think he will do a good job. He'll be responsive, but I still think — we may be wrong — but I think there's going to be a problem on Avenue X because of the density of it, with all that traffic.
But we'll see. We'll see. Maybe this will be the test to see how it affects because … he's not the last one to want to build right across from Tech. So I think we need to wait and see how that plays out before we take too many more steps in that direction.
Follow-up question for McBrayer:
The student housing projects that are currently in North Overton are aging.
How can the city hold these projects more accountable so that they don't fall into disrepair?
McBrayer:
A city is always an evolving thing and there's no such thing as a district or housing development, even, that over time, won't, you know, not be what it was, you know, not be the bright, shining new thing that it was, so that's just a natural evolution in a city.
I think what we have to do is make sure that the neighborhood, the quality of life in the neighborhoods, stays as equal as possible all across the city. And part of that's dealing with the crime problem, part of it's dealing with code enforcement.
There are other ways that you can work on holding landlords accountable for what they have. It's something I really want to look into, because I have a hard time, you know, enforcing a lot of ordinance control over what a woman living on a fixed income trying to enforcing her to spend a lot of money to keep up her house. But someone who operates it as a business, is making income off of it, I have a little bit different attitude towards them and a little bit different expectation of them. But at the moment, in our city, you have to treat them all pretty much equally.
There may be a way that we can look at a different enforcement mechanism, but that's going to take some looking, and I know there's a lot of opposition to doing anything like that too.
Question for Massengale:
You’ve said that budget cuts are decisions made by the city manager based on priorities set by the mayor and the council.
We know that the police and public safety are your highest priorities. What is your lowest priority?
Massengale:
Well, I think my priority is always going to be first and foremost to provide for our first responders. We have to look at this on a year by year basis, and these are the people that care for us or respond to us when we're at our worst, and I want to make sure that we have the best firefighters and policemen, and that requires being vigilant on their compensation. Not only for the region, now it's becoming statewide and even bigger.
So first and foremost, at the same time, I would always focus on making sure we have a lower tax rate and do everything we could not to raise the tax rate, but I'm also going to be a mayor that makes sure we provide all the services that citizens expect. And so that can be a grueling process, but I think it's led by the mayor, and the mayor can lead the tone of that discussion, and I look forward to doing that.
Question for McBrayer:
You’ve said that budget cuts are decisions made by the city manager based on priorities set by the mayor and the council.
We know that the police and public safety are your highest priorities. What is your lowest priority?
McBrayer:
Gosh, what would be my lowest priority? That is a question I have never thought of before. That’s a question nobody asked me.
The lowest priority for me is things that are very expensive to maintain, that have very little usage. Okay, now what fits that category? Different things may fit that category, but because you're taking money out of people's pockets to do certain things, your first priority is safety. Second priority is probably streets and street maintenance and your basic infrastructure. Your third level priorities are what we call quality of life things.
So what I want to look at is what gets the most use and most benefits to the largest number of people, for the lowest cost to the city. And those are the things you should try to put your quality of life money towards parks are a good example of it. Parks don't cost anybody. Citizens don't pay to use our parks. They're available to everyone. They're available to all ages. We want to have things in the parks that all ages can enjoy and that aren't expensive to maintain, and we don't have to charge people to use that's where the pools kind of have come into this whole issue.
People liked having those pools. I liked having the pools, but they were not maintained for a long time. And then we got into a situation where we couldn't keep lifeguards. They're an incredible liability issue for a city, and the maintenance costs on them are extremely heavy. And so, you know, you start having to, I know people love them and they want to keep them, but then you have to start looking at how many people… they're only open two months out of the year. So is that the best use of a large amount of money taken from your taxpayers, that only a few people use it only a few months out of the year? Or is there some other way, like walking trails and play facilities and basketball courts and things that people can use that are not expensive to maintain.
So I think that's the decision we have to make. You know, people are not going to like, you know, anytime you make a decision like that, it affects somebody, you know, whether it's the pools or the libraries or the parks, you want to get rid of the prairie dogs, somebody's going to get upset about that, you know. So you have to be willing to make some tough decisions. But in my mind, I'm looking for something that has the most benefit for the most citizens, at the lowest cost to maintain, because that's where you spread your tax dollars out further.
When it comes to recycling in the city of Lubbock, we’ve heard that it’s “not feasible” for a number of reasons including proximity and cost.
What steps need to be taken in these early stages in order ot make this a possibility for Lubbock’s future?
Massengale:
I’d love for us to have a recycling center and I would love for it to be economically feasible for the city to provide better recycling services, I think as we look at the economies of the situation we’ll continue to monitor it. If it becomes feasible, I'm fully supportive of it.
In the meantime, I think the city needs to make sure that we’ve got recycling centers that are as close as possible to everybody and make sure we’re accommodating whatever needs may come from recycling.
McBrayer:
Let's take the issue of the trash transfer station, you know, I wanted us to take another look at where we are locating it, but my decision was never based on whether or not we should have one. It’s an excellent idea and our staff did an excellent job at presenting the need for it and a part of that, long term, was a recycling center. Frankly, they said one of the problems is at the moment we have to haul our recyclable material so far that it's not cost effective.
If we could have a center here, we could recycle and we could draw from other places around to make one that is cost effective.
So that is in our long term plans, for our trash transfer station, is to have a recycling center there. It's kind of like, the same thing with, I’m very much a conservative person. Being a conservative doesn't mean I don't care about water, the environment, or trash. People who know me know I absolutely hate seeing– I will not drink water hardly ever out of a plastic bottle. I just don't like all that trash.
So we have to be able to recycle, we have to be able to handle that trash. So I'm very much in favor of us going forward with something like that because it’ll help solve a problem that we have right at the moment in the community.
I want Lubbock, we used to be- and I think we still have it “Keep Lubbock Beautiful”. Lubbock can be quite a beautiful city, part of it is because we have just such a beautiful sky and you go out right now we’ve had enough rain, you go out and walk the streets. It's just a beautiful place.
I tell people you come at the right time of year to Lubbock you think you died and went to heaven. There’s sometimes you think you died and went to hell but you know most of the time you think you’re in heaven. Especially right now in the spring before the dust starts to blow. I love Lubbock, Lubbock is a great place to live.
Through this mayoral race, what are some things you’ve learned from the community that you can implement as a leader going forward, if elected?
Massengale:
That’s a pretty broad question. You know, I don't think you get reminded enough that you have to sit back and listen more and talk less. Something I focus on as I do the job, but sometimes in a campaign you might lose sight of, but just making sure you stay in touch and understand what are on the citizens minds and make sure you can take that and convert it to some good work moving the community forward.
McBrayer:
I think people in Lubbock are ready, my campaign theme is “Choice for a New Direction”, I think people are ready to take a new direction at City Hall. That’s the reason I got in the race, I didn't have to aIl, I didn't really want to at first. I’ve served two years on the city council. I was planning to fill out my term, and then if I did a good job and people wanted me to stay there then I'd run again.
But when Trey [Payne] decided he wasn’t going to run again, I knew Steve [Massengale[ would want to run. Of course I served with Steve and Steve’s spent a lot of time serving the city but Steve and I are different. Different priorities and different approaches to things. For the past two years that I’ve been on the council, I never voted for a tax increase on our citizens. And he’s been there for eight years and every tax rate he's ever voted for always increased the taxes on the average citizen. So, that’s one main difference but there are others as well, quality-of-life and neighborhoods and things like that, different approaches to how we deal with the crime problem., building a bunch of buildings or paying our police officers an adequate pay.
So, I made the decision to get in the race so people would have a choice. I don't like it when not many people vote in mayor elections and I think a lot of times that’s because ‘Ah, what difference does it make?’ It’s the same people or the same groups that put forward those people and support those people’, ‘New boss is the same as the old boss’ kind of thing.
So, I got in [the election] because I felt like citizens wanted a real choice, a real option of somebody to vote for, and that seems to [have] been proven out in the initial election and I think it’s gonna be proven out in the runoff as well. People are ready for a change at City Hall and someone down there who knows they represent the citizens and the taxpayers and not City Hall.
And that’s what I hope to be, is a voice for the people and I hope we have a great turnout in this election to show that people finally believe that there's a choice there and they’re happy to have that choice and are going to make that choice.