Back to Podcasts


Welcome to the Master Your Millions podcast.
The show all about your financial potential and leaving a legacy for future generations.
Here are your hosts, Jason and Scott Henderson.
Welcome back everyone.
I am your host, Scott Henderson and my Co host is Doctor Jay.
We are very excited for our special guest today.
Jason, who do we have coming on?
Today's guest is Jennifer Novak.
She comes to us through a mutual friend, if you will.
She's been in here just too, and we're happy to have her on the podcast today.
She's an LA native and was born and raised there and when then went away to Northern California, went a long, long ways away, Northern California to Berkeley.
And then you UC Davis is a a wife and a mother of two, I believe grown children, that she has an attorney, whatever specialties is in environmental law.
And the cool thing is we're going to discuss today is how going from generation to generation and passing on businesses and ideas sometimes can be problematic.
And she helps kind of guide people through that maze, if you will.
So welcome to the show, Jennifer.
Thank you.
I'm so excited to be here.
Appreciate it.
To start off a little bit, tell us how you was that you came into environmental.
I know that you always wanted to be an, an an attorney growing up.
What was it that drew you into environmental law and that?
Well, it it was actually a bit of a happy accident.
I was interested in environmental issues, but from more of a practical standpoint.
I studied both geography and land use planning and college, but I wanted to be a lawyer just to to help people and it wasn't until about five years into my legal career that an opportunity came up to go work for the California Department of Justice in their Natural resources section.
And that's basically the outside law firm for most of California's natural resources agencies, who are the ones imposing all these regulations on businesses and people and trying to balance keeping everyone safe and protecting the environment with the very real practicalities of needing an economy and needing businesses.
And the fact that we use products that use chemicals and metals and and things of that nature.
So after 10 years at the Department of Justice, learning all about how environmental regulations are made and how to balance them, I ended up in the private sector again, where I founded my own law firm and we focused solely on environmental issues, primarily helping property owners and businesses navigate this world.
And we've been at it for almost 11 years, and I was gonna say for a lot of our listeners and even myself, give us some examples of what you do because that's like way out in right field compared to what we do every single day.
So what?
What's a typical day look like and what are some typical cases you take on?
Well, let me take a step back and say I I realized that for many people, they don't feel like environmental law impacts their daily lives.
But if you really think about it, there's very few things you do in the course of your day that are not guided by an environmental law.
The quality of the air you breathe, the quality of the water you drink, what kind of materials can go into the clothing you're wearing, or the furniture that you have in your home, whether you could put a school right by, you know, a refinery, all of those things are guided by environmental laws.
And of course, in California, we're a little more rigorous than about this than in other places.
On a typical day, we can represent, for example, terminals and ports that have that can't take up and move to Texas, for example, they have emissions, they have to worry about, they have oil and other products that can go into the water and affect are aquatic environments.
We have clients were wineries, because that is technically an industrial process and they have rules about how they can handle their materials and whether they're gonna go into the water.
We have clients who invest in properties out in places like the far flung desert that then get a letter in the mail telling them that they're being accused of being criminals and having heard the environment because of drug cartel was illegally growing marijuana on their property without their knowledge.
Those are all examples of people that we help and it can also get down to things like Father, son, two person, transmission repair, businesses that send their used oil off to recyclers like you're supposed to do, and then find out that if that recycler mishandled it and has caused massive contamination, everyone else in that stream of commerce is now a polluter as well.
So a lot of it is demystifying and quite environmental laws are, and a lot of it is helping people who are good people.
It's just the way our system is is designed.
Unfortunately, they can find that there are consequences for just engaging in business or just owning certain types of property.
So give us three, probably the top three issues that you see when it comes to passing, because I mean our our our podcast is all about accumulating wealth that join wealth and passing it on and it sounded which we said earlier you said something about how I'm the dad and I started a business and this is how I do it and now I'm getting getting old.
I'm not.
I'm getting old.
Hypothetically, I pathetically I guess watch a young man.
I'm getting rolled and I want to pass my business on to the next generation, say to Scott and he's coming up and things are different.
What are some top time and type?
Type 3 might be a formidable problems, or issues that you see kind of an engineering way that business owners need to be thinking about.
I mean, the first is that often families are lumping all of their assets together into a trust, or they just hold them, and when it passes on to the next generation, no one is segregated out, potentially problematic assets.
So if for example, you had a business that in the past had created some level of pollution at a property, the fact that now time has passed or there may be new owners doesn't matter in terms of your legal liability.
If you would segregate it, that piece of property or that business from the rest of your assets, then you give us some examples.
Maybe it's a not a mechanic that changes oil, or what's an example?
Something that you say say you owned property and you leased it to a dry cleaner back in the 50s, sixties, 70s when they were using right and now I mean we do have a client who's in this situation.
You know, she's the trustee of a family trust, and they're having problems deciding whether they can release assets from the trust to the beneficiaries because they're going to be responsible for cleaning up contamination that is now been found at their property.
They didn't cause it.
They were just the people who rented to the dry cleaner, but as the property owners, that is their problem, and because the dry cleaning property is one of many assets that they hold.
All of their assets are potentially at risk to pay for the contamination that was caused at that site.
So that's one example.
OK, why are they all at risk?
Because the question is whether or not the trust itself, or whoever holds that asset has the money to pay for it.
I mean, if if you're balancing these questions from a societal standpoint, we have an interest generally in not letting pollution exist and and put our drinking water at risk for oceans at risk hurting people's health that they're breathing in fumes.
So the general rule is that if someone can pay to clean it up, they're gonna be held responsible to clean it up.
And even if it was just the one asset, if it's commingled with everything else, then the question isn't, well, what was that asset worth?
It is.
Does this family does this trust have the ability to pay for the problems that it cost?
So how should they have segregated them?
You know, often people are putting properties into a separate LLC.
If you have a a business incorporated and then we're really looking at the asks that corporation, if you have corporations honor the fact that there are formalities you have to follow in order to maintain that they are totally separate from everything else you have going on.
So, like corporate resolutions, annual shareholders meeting reject that type of thing.
So even though it's owned inside of a trust, the trust can own the LLC.
What you're saying that they should have created a separate LLC to hold this property versus other LLC insight, which trust owning this is, does that make it enough of a separation?
It can't.
What you don't want is for the trust to be the owner and then to be able to trace it back.
So ultimately ultimately, you know, you've gotta look at that whole chain of ownership and then decide whether or not somebody is just, you know, hiding something or whether we truly can say it is separate from everything else.
So that is 1 area that we example, yeah, we we get a lot of calls from people who have inherited commercial properties and it turns out someone in the past may have caused harm to it.
You know, another example is when we have a business that there were subject to environmental regulations and maybe something was missed or maybe there was just an accident and now the business itself may be something that isn't going to be a retirement plan for the family.
It's gonna be something that they have to address because they're accused of having created a bigger problem and that could be, for example, Chrome platers gas stations.
You know, those are just some of the ones we see most commonly, but it doesn't have to be heavy industrial.
It could be, like I said, commercial properties as well.
You know, we represent people who are developers and in the course of, you know, creating an apartment building or something of that nature.
They're also subject to this, and so the asset that you're looking at May now actually owe money.
You didn't budget for because you didn't consider the potential environmental liabilities or costs.
I feel like you should have written a book about this.
Have you done so?
Have not.
No, you know, but for me, I do videos that I put on YouTube.
I love to come on podcasts like this because I'm very much about educating people and I think I said it earlier.
We tend to be judgmental when we think about the environment, pollution.
The reality is that the way the laws are set up, the definition of polluter is actually really brought and many people who would never in a million years classify themselves as being bad people or polluters, just from a legal standpoint, that's what they become, and it's a real shock to them to learn that even though they thought that they were doing everything correctly, you know it's a strict liability situation and and in the law that just means it doesn't matter what your intent was.
It doesn't matter if you made a mistake.
We're only looking at the end result and that's what makes you responsible.
So playing a little bit of devil's advocate, I'm not trying to cause contention here, but today we've got a property that I bought this year.
And someone pleaded on it 100 years ago.
Then I get accused for that.
It's my liability.
It can be yes.
How is what's the justification behind that scene as I hit?
I'm not even born 100 years ago, Jason was, but I wasn't.
But like what?
What is the justification behind that law?
Because for a lot of people new to this, they come in and they're like, that's ridiculous.
There's no way that I should be held by able.
We should go back in the records and track down who it was.
Well, let me separate out two different concepts.
The first is what I just discussed is this issue of strict liability.
So you bought the property.
You own whatever's on it.
You own the structure you own.
The contamination you own the you know the the proximity to good schools and shops and and what have you.
So the easiest way for us to look at how we're gonna clean up a mess is to look at who currently is in the best position to do something about it.
And unfortunately, the easiest person to find is the person who owns it now.
And that's why taking a little sidetrack, a lot of people have a Trump have trouble getting financing because the banks are more and more in tune to the fact that they don't want to lend on a property that may have these legal liabilities, where if it's foreclosed, now the bank owns the problem.
And so that's why they'll require environmental assessments and that's why people are recommended to get environmental assessments of their own before buying a property.
So that's, you know, one part of it.
The second is that of course, if you are the person who just bought the property, you have no connection to anything.
In the past, you do have the right to drag those people in, but the way that the law is set up, that then falls on you to bring them in and try to force them to be held accountable for what happened in the past and going back.
Jason, to your question about, you know, like Dad or Grandpa or whomever.
What do we want them to know before we start moving down into the other generations?
But we want everybody to keep their records from all of that, and I see lots of people who are moving their family members into assisted living or family member dies and everybody clears out.
You know the warehouse or the garage?
They're throwing away gold because in those pieces of paper are documents that say whether or not you use the chemicals in this business or at this property that are now being found in the grant.
There are things that talk about whether there were insurance policies back in the day that might cover any harm that's found here.
There might be names of tenants.
I have a lot of clients who don't even know who the tenants were who are on their property 2040 years ago, and so all of these things can help provide you that defense.
And then Scott, to your point, if it turns out to have been somebody 50 years ago, 100 years ago, maybe now you have that information where you can either a offer it up to the government and say, hey, how about you check out these guys instead or B if it someone's gonna drag you into a lawsuit or some sort of administrative action, you can, you know, demonstrate that these are the people who really should be held responsible.
Is it always the government that comes in and is the accuser?
Or is it usually someone that raises a white flag or a red flag and says these guys are being irresponsible?
I see it both ways, and so here's an example.
Let's say you own a piece of property in a business park and you you wanna sell it.
And like I just said, the bank is gonna want to look at what kind of investment they're about to make.
A lot of times in the course of that environmental assessment, they're gonna say, wait a second.
We're just an office building.
Why are we coming up with petroleum products or dry cleaning fluids?
Or, you know, some sort of chemical that is used in munitions, and then they're gonna look around and say, well, where could this have come from?
And sometimes you'll find out that your own property had a history.
You weren't aware of, but more often you're gonna look around and realize.
So it's the next door neighbor or it's a property down the street and now we know that that property is a problem.
That's how it can come to attention.
Occasionally, the government may just look around and say, well, we know dry cleaners are a problem historically.
So now let's go look at all the dry cleaning sites that we can to see whether or not they're a problem.
But generally, the government doesn't have that kind of resource.
So it's the private parties then who are looking to say, well, it's not my fault.
My my properties contaminated you, Mr Neighbor, caused it.
And now, what are you gonna do about it?
See is there any regulation in place for me?
Just going down the street and saying, oh, you're at fault, not having any idea whatsoever but just causing problems certain process because from the other people that I've talked to, it sounds like that it's pretty easy to accuse someone almost like you're not innocent before you have to prove your innocence rather than prove that they're guilty.
No, absolutely makes sense and it it really is a topsy turvy world, even for lawyers who aren't environmental lawyers.
It's confusing to them the fact that this system is built up to prove your innocence and you are in effect guilty until you can prove that the separate out the government versus a private party.
So if if I'm just a guy buying a business and I think you've caused and and I and I accuse you of having created a problem in that circumstance, if I'm gonna sue you or I'm threatening you, I still have to prove a direct connection between you and what I think the problem is.
There is still a level of proof there.
What often happens is the government suspects or has some information to suspect that OK, well, maybe you've caused a problem and then they really they start this little for lack of a better word game.
You know, they'll first ask you for information.
What do you know about the place where you work or the place where you're located?
And again, that we're not just limited to industrial, commercial discon affect residents too.
So it'll be some information gathering and then it might be some what we now we'd like you to sample.
We have some information that suggests this property may be subject to some sort of environmental contamination.
We would like you to hire a consultant and do some sampling and then at each stage you're asking am I clear now?
Have I demonstrated there's no problem here and you can get yourself out from under it, but you've in the meantime had to pay a significant amount of money, and that's what burns people quite a bit.
Is that wait a second?
Why are you coming after me?
And usually it doesn't come out of nowhere.
Usually the situation is they go ohh.
We know that there was once a you're still in the blank business that traditionally pollutes on this property.
At some point, though, where you handle certain chemicals at this property at some point time, therefore, we want to check that you didn't cause a problem.
That's kind of the the reasonable basis that they will give to start asking for that information.
So you're essentially could self incriminate through this question and answer this cat and mouse game.
Yes, I mean it is there is a level of science if you if you go digging around in the soil at your property and you come up with chemicals where those chemicals come from, right, but it it can also be that it's really not a problem you've caused.
It's someone else is infecting your property, for lack of a better word.
And you can make that demonstration, but if businesses haven't planned for this possibility, if they don't know it's a possibility, then it's a real shock to suddenly be told.
Oh, and by the way, this could cost you 10, twenty, $50,000 just for you to get to the place for the government says.
OK, you're good.
So the government doesn't pay for it.
It comes out no more direct pocket and you have no choice in the matter.
And and and and.
Here's something that's very scary, which is often people are being told this in in a letter on government letterhead.
And so it doesn't look like a lawsuit.
It doesn't look like something any more important than any other, you know, form letter you might receive, but usually at the end, they're gonna give you a deadline and they're gonna tell you if you don't confine, you could be subject to penalties.
And that's your tip off that this is actually a very serious matter and you should at the very least go talk to a consultant.
Go talk to a lawyer and find out more about that situation.
Though the first question I often get is whether this is some sort of scam, and that's true whether or not it's a letter from the government or a letter from an environmental group, or a letter from the next door neighbor.
A lot of people are thinking, well, wait a second.
This doesn't look legitimate to me and so I have to go through that educational process to explain.
OK, here's what it means.
And sometimes they're overreaching.
So we can pull them back.
But yes, very often you're gonna have to have some level of response or you completely lose the right to complain about it later.
OK, so it just seems like laws up on its head, it's upside down from what everything else.
Why is it that way?
Why is it not more of innocent until proven guilty or some of these other things where the government has a little bit of responsibility?
Where if they accuse someone wrongly they are they have to foot the bill like that.
Seems that seems outrageous.
Well, at some point in our history, you decisions were made about where we wanted to put our emphasis and our priorities.
And you know, having worked for the government, and I swear there were times where we were not allowed to use pens if we couldn't, we couldn't get pens paper out of the supply room because the budget was preventing my department from even buying supplies.
I get the fact that if we only relied on the government to expend its resources to find out who's causing problems, we wouldn't be catching a lot of situations and there might be perfectly innocent people.
For example, you know you own an apartment building and there are fumes coming from the gas station next door that could hurt the people in your building.
Will you need to recourse?
Can you imagine then if if now the government had to go and find actual proof that 50 years ago this gas station caused the problem?
But you know it's now in your apartment building sometimes.
Yes, they have to.
And sometimes we wanna make it as easy for the government as possible to protect people who are truly innocent.
It's so it's not uncommon that most people will hold individual properties in individual LLC's to protect them from liability from the property property, property.
So you don't pull it in there, So what you start off with is saying that and even in this situation, so if someone comes into, say, a purchasing a new asset, whether that's a property with that's an apartment complex, whether that's a business, whatever that as part of the due diligence and then I'm hearing you correctly, you're highly recommending that they do an environmental study, correct.
Now let's say this an environmental study comes back.
Say yeah, you seem to be good.
One of the things that has changed over the years is our ability to detect the locals.
You know, it used to be parts per hundred, and then it was parts per thousand.
Then it's parts per million and we're starting to be in the parts per billion. And this level of danger is changing.
Well, you have a certification that you have the environmental study says it's good and you go into there and you can prove with A and you've done good and having your corporate resolutions, your annual things and so on.
This has been our business as we've done.
Maybe it's even like you said, apartment complex.
You know, you inspect the the apartments are not anything going on there and then the law changes, right?
It completely changes and now with that new threshold there's a problem.
Or is there some sort of grandfathering clause that would allow you to escape some of that madness?
Yeah, I I'm gonna give you the lawyer answer if it depends.
But first of all, what you pointed out you pointed out is that would actually be really good news, which is somebody who's truly done their due diligence and not even to the level of going into the individual apartments and seeing if there's a problem.
But hiring a reputable consultant had looking honestly and seriously at what the property is like, what it's history was, and getting the conclusion in a report from the consultant that we we've decided there does not appear to be a risk here that can be used as a defense.
So is that part of a a regular inspection or is it something you you're you're talking about a consultant?
Someone who's a specialist, an environmental geologist is generally one of the people who's gonna come in and look at it.
But there are.
I don't know.
Not dozens, maybe hundreds of companies that handle environmental consulting issues, and most of them can handle this type of of work to do that assessment.
And if you have that level of due diligence, then we have what we call a bonafide perspective purchasers we have, we have things that where you can show that it's not like you bought a property that you knew had problems or could have problems and you agreed to buy it and take on that responsibility anyway.
So that can be a shield in terms of your responsibility.
And in those situations, then your obligation is more along the lines of, OK, well, if they need your cooperation, they need to come onto your property to do testing.
If they need you to answer questions, you'll agree to help them.
But now it's not all on you.
The problem JSON is that many people get into these transactions and they're so eager to take advantage of the deal or they think it looks good or they don't wanna spend the five to $10,000 to do an environmental assessment.
And then they just leap into the situation and sooner or later they will deal with the consent or wherever they sell it to later put deal with the concept.
Is that really what we're talking to, spike to $10,000 to do an assessment.
I mean, if you have a.
A duplex that's worth 120,000.
You're talking about a 10% increase in the in the investments of what you're putting in there.
I mean, all of a sudden it's not gonna cash flow.
It's not gonna be worth anything.
Well, then you you do that.
I I guess that's a risk.
You're you take what?
I'm not suggesting that everybody do it.
I mean, we we didn't do it.
We bought our house, for example.
You can ask yourself some questions in that type of scenario to ask yourself.
You know how?
How are you gonna weigh the whether this is a good risk or whether I should invest the money?
So obviously an industrial property, commercial properties that may have had a, you know gas station or dry cleaner or something on it that could cause problems.
If you're located in near airport, you're located near an industrial area.
I mean those kinds of places you generally are gonna be thinking you might wanna know what you're getting into.
You can also go to some of the government websites and enter an address and the property you're looking at might not appear.
That doesn't mean there's no problems, it just means it's not on the government's radar.
But you certainly can look around who your neighbors are going to be to see if, oh, across the street was a gas station with a leaking underground storage tank.
What are the status of that is now and whether or not a problem is ever detected on my property?
So you might not always need to do that assessment, but just be cautious and certainly you know I've I've seen people who have invested in properties and they have not asked the questions or they just assumed everything will be OK like you know, Scott and you're scenario I didn't call this right.
I'm fine now.
There's no dry cleaner here.
Now, that doesn't mean you're 100% out of the woods.
I hope that was helpful.
I mean, so again, no to scaring Holly.
We don't want to do anything.
We're just 100% scary.
I give this talk some I I give this talk once and somebody approached me afterward, he said.
I used to own a whole bunch of cats.
Stations like this is really frightening to me and I said, well, you know, we'll see what happens, right?
Doesn't mean that necessarily someone going to come after you, but there are obviously ways in which you can try to protect yourself.
We talked about segregating assets another way, might be to purchase insurance.
Your general liability insurance is not gonna cover it.
Environmental insurance is available, though expensive, but it can save people's bacon if they need it.
Another option is getting financial assurances from whoever is in the transaction.
There are indemnity provisions that can be put in that are good to a point.
They can also fail if whoever agreed to identify you doesn't have any assets.
There's no longer around and sometimes I mean there are definitely people out there who, once they discover their might be a risk that they'll be cleaning up a property.
They'll darkened down to like nickels on the dollar and say, look it.
I'm gonna have to clean this up.
I'm not paying you full price and there are plenty of people will sell it to you at discount simply because they don't want that problem.
There's also state money that or federal money that can be available in certain circumstances.
So again, if you if you don't know these questions to ask, but how are you gonna arm yourself with understanding whether or not this is a good deal or a bad deal?
They should do the Scott says.
It seemed like you should read the book.
That's what I feeling like this, too.
That's something that, well, maybe you've inspired me learn minds of the investment in different properties from the environmental point of view or something like that, right.
And I, you know, on the whole, I'm a very positive person.
I love solving problems for people.
I tell people I'm not certain how I ended up in this field cause a lot of time it does feel very doom and gloom.
It's scary, but my hope is that if people know what questions to ask, know how to gauge their assets, their investments, their actions, it's not gonna be doom and gloom for everybody and some of the people could catch problems before they become more difficult to deal with down the road.
It's just as humans, we have this tendency to not want to know the bad news and to always assume it's gonna be the worst possible news.
So we won't confront it.
So that's what you would suggest is just let's confront it.
Now let's get the scary skeleton out of the closet and at least know what it is.
And a lot of times it's not all that scary, but being proactive and, you know, thinking your way through it, segregating assets, I mean that's a very simple thing.
And that's probably the the biggest GEM of this whole episode is those that have assets and you, you segregate them out period, right.
Right, you have a.
Do you have any feel?
So this is a question you have.
Any feel how series LLC's work?
Would that be segregation?
And enough.
Or does it mean completely understand where a series LLC.
Yeah, this I do.
That's that's one way and not every state has accepted them as valid.
But that is a different way of segregating properties right into a separate LLC.
Not than needing a completely separate IRS filing for taxes by understanding it, right?
Does it?
Do you have any feeling there?
What those?
How those work in this situation, there's the correct answer.
And then there's the strategic answer.
From a correct standpoint, again, you're looking at who owns what, owns what owns what owns what to ultimately get to the true owner.
So my feeling is you're not gonna fully protect yourself unless it is a completely different entity.
You know, like you said, taxable, you know, technically different corporate structure than anything else.
And I have had clients, you know Property LLC, #1 Property LLC, #2 and that's how they hold various properties, which is a pain in the ****.
Let's be honest, however, from a strategic standpoint, when someone comes knocking on your door and says, hey, your property is causing a problem for me and that's whether it's the government or private entity, how hard is it going to be for them to figure out what you're truly worth and therefore what you can dedicate to this problem?
That's the strategic question.
And you know, I I will say that the government doesn't scare easily, but they also like the path of least resistance.
So a whole bunch of hoops to go through quite get them to turn their attention to an easier target temporarily.
That doesn't mean you can completely get out of this, but it does mean that maybe at some point they decide to go after the current property owner or to negotiate with you to see what they can get.
Again, it's not bulletproof, but yeah, my advice would be keep that completely 100%.
So then do you need to go to the extent cabin now Wyoming LLC or Delroy or Corporation?
They get even more anonymity.
Is that make the path least less resistant?
That's a good question because you know, we just wrote about the Corporate Transparency Act kicking in this year where all the LLC S, regardless of where they are gonna have to fess up as to who the true owners are.
And through a chain as well, that information is currently going to be held by the federal government, but I could very easily see a situation where states want that information too.
So I'm not certain that at the end of the day, putting into Wyoming, LLC gives you any more protection than a California LLC, for example.
You still want it to be its own thing, and then certainly we have clients who like don't put my name on anything.
You know, I don't want to witness to something, but it's at some point in time, even the LLC might need a representative.
And then you're kind of out of the hiding.
But if you have that corporate structure, you've maintained it and it's legally its own entity that gives you some protection from awesome.
Well, this has been a wonderful conversation.
Thank you so much for you're welcome.
Always happy to to tell people something about my world and to get more people thinking about what they can do to protect themselves and their families.
Definitely something a subject that I had never really thought of, but it's something that's those that are listening to us and hopefully giving us good reviews and things and wanting to build their wealth, the mask, their millions as we talk about, they need to be.
This is something they need to have on their radar, right?
And if they already have real estate attorneys, business attorneys, you know, trust attorneys easy enough for them to take care of this problem, they just need to know that there might be a problem first, right?
And of course, we want to put your maybe your website or something at the bottom case someone wants to specialist such as yourself and the environmental law space.
Everyone, we will be putting that in the show's appreciate that because like I said, too often people didn't take the actions that they need to in the past.
And then I'm the one who's got the legal mess to clean up.
And then, Jennifer, when that book publishes, you can come back on the show.
And autopsies Everest sign.
We have first we just #1.
I will absolutely come back and do that wonderful.
Well, thank you again, Jennifer.
Guys, if you'd like to connect with Jason or I, please hit us up on our social media platform.
Take your pick.
You can always find us also if you want to connect with Jennifer.
Her links will be in the show notes down below, and if you would leave a 5 star review for us, that would be extremely helpful.
Last, remember, mastering your millions all starts with your mind and your team.
Make sure they are the best.
Get you next.
Thanks for listening to master your millions with Jason and Scott Henderson.
Check the show notes for any links for contact information about today's guests.
Make sure to follow the show so you don't miss any future episodes.