Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. to you. Would you like to leave things or other reasons to keep? Well, I think it's pretty easy. So you go ahead and leave things. I may have trouble seeing people's hands and stuff. So I'll leave it to you and jump in if you need, but you're doing quite so far. Sounds good. Karen, then I will turn it over to you. Perfect. Good move. That's okay. Good morning, everyone. So we put to share. Today, the first item for discussion is the to be printed later today, but these are draft and just sharing it with the committees since we are doing this before the work session. So overall the general fund tax revenues at this point are almost 1% behind budget and almost 4% ahead of last year's first quarter of the results. And this is the general fund tax revenues. And just a closer look into each of those. The personal company tax is pretty much close to budget at this time. A little bit ahead. We have information information or a review that there are some more vehicles, information from DMV that's going to be added in. So I'm expecting this is going to exceed budget by the end of the year. Sales tax is behind budget by 1%, this includes two ones worth of data, and a head of last year by 4.3%. And there is a split between the online sales are behind last online sales and our last quarters. So which is could be just that last time one big vendor bought some construction and a good trend or not. The meal stacks was a little surprising. It's behind budget by almost 9%. The other alarming thing was it's behind last year's, and this is three months of worth of data July August and September. Behind last year's first quarter, as well as quite 2.3%. This is not factoring the opening of the delay, but we hadn't projected even more foods or other things to open even by September anyway. So it wasn't in that calculation. The budget amount that's calculated here is removing that additional revenue that we were going to take and just moving out the 12th of, and then taking three months without that and doing that. So what I'm trying to say is that this is not just one quarter of the annual budget. It's factoring how the increase that we had projected from new development and then a quarter of. Okay, so we're so basically you're saying that the numbers we are seeing are not what you did the overall yearly projection on. They're recalibrated for the things that didn't just and just factoring out of that quarter. So we are still we then still need to get the back back in the next three quarters. Yeah. Yeah. Hotel tax, the transient occupancy taxes on the positive with the opening of the home to suites and then the meeting house place. And significant increase over budget. Other taxes are behind budget. The decreases in refluxation tax and decal. And refluxation, we are expecting that with the various property, the various properties that might involve that we're going to see this increase over the rest of the year. And then the Commissioner of Revenue is expecting to capture more cars. So hopefully the other taxes will improve. And we're not going to see the negative behind budget that we're seeing in the first floor. That is the tax revenues going over to other tax revenue categories, charges for services are 8.7% ahead budget and this is primarily due to recreation programs. Some of our programs did well. In investment revenues, we are still in the higher interest rate zone. So is ahead of budget by a significant amount. License and permits are, it's a tough comparison because sometimes the major projects come in on unplanned months so this is still we collect almost we budget almost 50,000, 45 to 50,000 and regular activities the home home improments, and then there's a factor for larger projects. So this, I mean, three months of data, honestly, is not enough. We need to see more on this and find the properties is behind budget. Hopefully this will pick up with the new speed camera. So this is where the first quarter is. And I want to mention that in two weeks, we're going to come with the next year's revenue projections. We're not going to have a whole lot more data, maybe one month more on meals and sales tax. It comes like about the 20th of the month or so. And we see moving, but in the next is in the in the next week or so. And other than that, the real estate they've started probably some early payments coming in, but it's hard to project a December 5th is the line that's for closer to the deadlines when they get most of it. So it's it's going to be a challenging revenue protection and not having any information on the new developments, they backed off new developments. It's gonna be. We may have to go with like a percentage kind of a scenario of what I'm thinking. Herein, yes, are we? Is there any way that we can check and make sure that all of our new restaurants are paying their meals next? That just is so stunning to me that it's low. Yeah, we had a conversation with the commissioner and they are, they normally work with businesses and they haven't seen a whole lot of trend of people wanting to spread things out or have a payment plan or anything. We are going to have in the staff report of and that appendix, the number of businesses and average bills. The information we have so far is only to June or July on that one, and Daniel is working on it. If I can get that, I'll attach that for the Monday's report. I would like to quickly read Leigh in just in case, and then Peter will go to you. Leigh, can you, Ms. Fart party? Can you identify the remote location, the reason for your participation? Even in the last meeting we had to do it? Yeah, because that was a council meeting. Yeah, it's a committee. We're positive. We shouldn't even do it for safety or it's right. But I've been there. Well, I just part of space in the just okay, so we just want to be. All right, Peter, we'll go to you. Yeah, thanks. So, Karen, can I just ask based on the data that you just shared and knowing that our meeting in December is only in a couple of weeks and things won't particularly change? What I'm hearing you say is that it's going to be December is only in a couple of weeks and things won't particularly change. What I'm hearing you say is that it's going to be a challenging revenue projection, and I'm trying to interpret what that means. Do you mean that it's going to be challenging to know what it is, or it's going to be challenging because we're not particularly where you think or hope that will be. Can you clarify that and then I have a follow up? I want to say a little bit of both because I'm seeing economic forecasts. There was one from Stephen Fuller and then Dr. Bailey provided one. There is some indication of things settling. I mean, things can be different here when new businesses are coming up. But these three months of data is, I don't wanna use the word alarming, but it's a small amount of data, but it is a different trend than what we have seen. It's been a while we've not seen a negative new stacks and sales tax kind of flattened, but negative is, it's, it's, it's indication. But at the same time, I also wanna say we don't have the impact of the new business is coming up. So that is the challenging part. What impact is it gonna have? Is it gonna add to what we have or is it going to take away from the existing businesses? So that that's remains to be seen. Great. So my next piece is probably less of a question and maybe more of a comment. And it's just that since there's four council members on the call and two board members. We did have on Tuesday night Stephen Fuller Institute come and share their projections with us. And I just kind of want to I think I said this last time, but I just want to reiterate that you know we've met our projection for this year, what Stephen Fuller projected. But we met our projection without the new construction coming online for residential, which is what they had originally built our projection on. And so the numbers that we're looking at in terms of growth for next year are really arranged between 150 new students and 200 new students will probably use a number in the neighborhood of about 157 to 160 just to be less conservative. But that indicates that, well, first for us just to be able to maintain our effort in terms of, you know, cost of living adjustments steps, inflationary costs in the school system, you know, and you'll hear this again in December, we really need at least four and a half percent, but then we're really talking about adding another four growth of that 150 plus kids, at least eight positions, and each of those positions are expensive as well. So I don't know if this is probably not the time to talk about it, but there may be a time where we're going to need to talk about some sort of carve out for growth or some option to look at growth because we have some obligations to our staff that we have to we have to fulfill and we have to hire new staff for the growth. So I just want to kind of put that out there that really you'll hear a number probably north of 9% need in the division in December at the December meeting to be able to meet the needs of growth and maintain our current efforts. So I don't know if there's a way, and maybe this is a question. So forgive me for my long statement, but perhaps this is a question, and the question would be, Stephen Fuller's been able to do their analysis of our growth. Is there a way that Stephen Fuller could do an analysis of your economic impact to project what the economic growth is going to be so that that could be incorporated into the overall budget strategy going forward to help meet the needs of growth in the schools. Maybe that's the question and if that's not clear, let know. I'm happy to try to say it a different way. And Peter, this is why I would add, I think we would welcome Stephen Fuller's thoughts on that. In addition, we do have the Tishlet or Bice model that we've been using for years, which we developed in concert with the schools just to try to predict what school costs would be as well as general government costs. And I think that's another resource that we can use for budget forecasting for the coming year and maybe multiple years. Thanks, Wyatt. I think the one thing I'm really anxious about and want to try to avoid and it seems like this is the right forum to have this conversation is having a need based on growth in the schools that can't be met by the current budget to where we end up having to say to you all the revenue share process that we've been in isn't sufficient to meet the needs of the school division. And I'd rather have that conversation behind closed doors than out in front. So if there's a way that we can get in front of that now so that maybe again there's a carve out or something to meet growth. That might be a reasonable solution so that you all, you being the city council, don't get, don't get the rat, I'll just share with you, I've had the wrath of our teachers at the wrath of our community and it's unpleasant. So we wouldn't want that to happen. So I'm just thinking if there's a way to resolve some of that behind the door, that might be a good opportunity for us. So I throw that out there as food for thought. My hand was up earlier, but I think Karen actually anticipated my question, which is to do the breakdown for meals tax for new businesses versus existing ones that I look forward to having that analysis. Karen, when you recalibrate it, how much fell out of quarter one that we need to make up in the other three quarters? It's a annual number. I think it was close to 200 by the thousand. Okay, so whatever it was with that, like there was a six points on the seven point, whatever. It's like it was reflected there. That's what I had come up with something like 200 right something okay and I understand the whole foods has us like the land yeah move on to the next slide. Oh, yeah, thanks. I'm looking forward to our, I think our next meeting altogether will be the, the joint budget meeting, which is always a great annual tradition are we working with? And I know sometimes that is kind of what anchors a lot of our conversations for that evening. And at least the time that I've been here, that has usually been presented like the day of. I was wondering from a processing cure, and you mentioned that some of these numbers you're trying to get at, you know, you still haven't gotten a full picture. So I fully understand that our joint meeting is kind of backed up into this quarter data collection. But is it possible for the board to get some kind of guidance around this earlier than the Monday meeting? We've got essentially four new board members are gonna be going through this process. And we would like to just have some time to process it with them, kind of make sure they understand what we're walking to for our full conversation on Monday night to be productive. So any thoughts on that or re-admctions that that's possible? Monday night is there, is your meeting on Monday? All right, talking about the joins the board to see Council December 2nd. So we do presentation which looks different to every single revenue category that's like an economic indicator. And that Monday is right after the long weekend, so I don't know how much ahead of time we can release the information. That's my other thing. If you would like, I mean, I'd be happy to be with some people and explain things. If that's necessary, I mean, if they would like to come to speed on how the revenue projections are done, I mean, I'm not sorry, I probably didn't understand what you're looking for. Ledy, did you reach up? Yeah, Keir and I think Tate was asking just for a read ahead an advance of Monday, like before 12, see like if it's going to be produced by Thursday or Friday, that seems like a reasonable request. Just so folks can familiarize. Yeah, it's a Thanksgiving weekend. So we'll try to publish it on Wednesday, but I can't promise it because there isn't a staff report that goes, there's only a PowerPoint that we do for the joint meeting. And it's a work in progress. But if we have limited data and things aren't going to move a whole lot, we'll try to, what the big piece I'm waiting on is the real estate revenues projections, assessment, assessment values. And there is a meeting with the regional partners on the 21st other than that. The staff is obviously looking at the city neighborhoods and projections. So we'll have some information on that that is a big chunk of our revenue projections as well. So we'll try to do it by Wednesday. I cannot promise at this very moment because it involves finance working with the executive team. And so I know why it is wanting to say something. Why it? Yes. We will endeavor Wednesday. Would that be satisfactory? Well, we may make some additional refinements on Monday, but we could get the main body of the information out as a read ahead on Wednesday before Thanksgiving. But yeah, thanks, why did we, yeah, fully understand that obviously holiday break. We, yeah, I think that would be helpful for us to just get everybody on board from the school board side to understand what we're doing, how the conversation can go. We fully understand there's a performance of nature of this, and it's a great opportunity for us to come together and do kind of an annual kickoff together. We're just, for me, at least, not just for me, I would like for us to get more into the conversation since the next time we all talk is our presentation of April 1st, and I would love to have some kind of anchor points of substance as much as possible. I fully understand here in that you're working around the clock on this and you've got data coming in. So we really appreciate it, but yeah, that's all I'm fully understand here and that you're working around the clock on this and you've got data coming in. So we really appreciate it, but yeah, that's all I'm asking. So that would be great. Why I appreciate you framing that. Um, holding along. The second item was the financial policies. So, Davenport is going to be here on Monday to give a presentation on their metrics and comparison of our debt and fund balance policies compared with the regional jurisdictions and that PowerPoint has been provided to the attachment but I will just kind of highlight some of the changes that expected changes in the staff report. And some of them are just some corrections. The one of the noticeable ones is a discussion that I think the group wanted to have about how to handle the portable housing funding plan, rather one-to long range plan. So can it be done as a part of a CIP or not done as part of CIP? There are a couple of jurisdictions out there that do it as part of their CIP. Most of them have units that they own. If it is going to be that financed in CIP, then we can't debt finance it unless it's a city property. So at this point, it's written like this, but it's up for discussion and how you all feel, and if you want us to look deeper into the information, we can do that too prior to Monday. You want to take it out from here? Or join? Any questions online? Yeah, why did you change it from a five-year to a six-year capital plan? I'm just wondering because that may change kind of what we're doing here. We are already doing a six year feeder. So this is just a correction. We do a six year with a 10 year outlook. That's the currency and either way we do it. It used to be a five year. It used to be a five year. So this is just really a correction. This one is also we are doing the best falls community CDA budgets. So these two are more like corrections. This is the new concept that we're planning. So proposing based on what we had heard from planning commission and the council members, as we were doing the fiscal year 25 CIP. So yeah, I think given some of the the challenges on the horizon with affordable housing in particular and those, you know, sunsending projects or sunsending units, it's important to have this in here and having seen the multiple times that you and Cindy have been peppered with questions that the planning commission about this, I think it's, you know, we need to have a conversation about what's happening where that's going and like a more full-sum conversation rather than just like line items on CCA. Yeah, yeah. I think the language, I suppose, I think is a really good start and I appreciate it. I've already submitted, I'm going to plan in commission next Wednesday. And so we've already written the staff report and identified affordable housing as one of our preliminary priorities for fiscal year 26 development. The way that we, the language in that report is developed financial policies which would allow affordable housing, funding and programming to be integrated into the annual CIP process, prioritized development of a multi-year plan for the use of the affordable housing fund. I think that agree, you know, that language and this are compatible. And like I said, I think it's a good start. I feel like what I took away from planning commission last year and those discussions was really just frustration over not having a long range plan. So I think if we just start with a long range plan for the affordable housing fund, even if it's still separate from CIP, that is like I said, a positive, positive direction that we're moving into. So and this language would support that, right? Yeah. Um, I have seen Tate and Mary Beth's hands up. Tate, do you have something you wanted to say? No, okay, Mary Beth, I'll see you. Um, Karen, you just mentioned that some jurisdictions own their own affordable housing. And yeah, that's something. They have their units. Yes. And they have in their CIP funding set aside. Perfect. So for clarification is localities housing authority that owns it. Rarely the local. And we don't have a housing authority. Correct. We do not have a housing authority. We do have the options to contract and have a relationship with others like Fairfax housing. Author. Nice. Can I ask one question about that and maybe why you were about to jump in with this. In terms of a housing authority, you're being able to, I mean, their challenges, and I'm not saying that we would be moving into, own and operate a affordable housing, but at the same time, in terms of how recurrently structured. And I think I had asked this question of you and Sally before, you know, like what kind of options are available to the city if we don't have a housing authority and this is just something in terms of this conversation. My understanding was that like technically the EDA can fill in like that portion by law where a city doesn't actually have a housing authority and there seem to be some discrepancies in how those different bodies kind of understood what roles they may or may not be able to have when a jurisdiction actually has its own housing authority. Well, the EDA can own the real estate, but they don't have authority to operate it as affordable housing. So that's one distinction. Arlington County is an interesting corollary. Arlington County does not have a housing authority. They do all of their investments. In affordable housing through nonprofit partnerships. And Arlington County also does not include affordable housing in its DIT. They do it through their affordable housing fund. I could be corrected on that, but that's my understanding of the situation. So that's what this sentence in the fiscal policy stands for is A, that we should do multiyear planning and we should do it through the Affordable Housing Fund and we should present it concurrently with the CIPs so that all these things can be seen together in one package in a unified way. But I think it reflects what arguably is a fairly strict reading of our charter that raises some potential summing blocks to having affordable housing explicitly in the CIP. Got it. Okay. So I'm just want to make sure that I understand in order to get the affordable housing explicitly in the CIP, it would we would be required to to change the charter, right? Well, I think we need to base look at it more closely and I need to also have the legal. Okay, that I'm not proposing that's what we're doing. I'm just I just want to make sure I understand what we would have to do if that was something. That we wanted. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, you know, I will say that's my view of it, but I recognize that I'm taking a pretty strict construction as view of the city charter and others could have different conclusions that has confirmed based on her review of it. She she agrees with that. But it's a complicated topic and so. for putting the city into boxes unnecessarily, but this, this seems to be a way that we could accomplish our goals without having a potential problem with the with the city charter. Right. I totally agree. Yeah. And I ask a question about the 10-year outlook language here. I see that we added that. It was my understanding that we did not, we adopt a six year budget and that we don't adopt the 10 year outlook. Is this, with this new language, does that mean that we will be adopting a 10 year CIP? But that's what we take to council. The six years, yeah, if you would, a 10 year old to be approved by the council. I years ago, if you would attend your office to be approved by the city council to follow the 10 year outlook. Like you want it to be the prepared update of six year capital improvement program changes to the CIP this year and one of the changes is removing the tenure outlook from the project sheets and moving it to a different section of the CIP. So it wouldn't be it's not it wouldn't be the adopt the part of the adopted budget the funding right and it wasn't in years. We only adopted the six years and the tenure outlook was just there for sort of informational. It was approved. It had to be approved by Council obviously, but it wasn't part of our budget ordinance. What does this propose that the tenure outlook is part of our budget ordinance? No. No. It's the same, but it's included in your tables. You do give a total number for the 10-year. I do. So that's, I'm, yeah. We're sort of working through taking that out of the tables and putting it in a different section. So that's why we should talk. I just wanted to understand that this language doesn't, or if it does, that's fine. We can adjust, but does it mean that the 10-year outlook would have to be in the tables and in the budget ordinance? Let's discuss. Okay, before it goes to front desk. Yes. Yeah. Anyone else want to comment before we move on? There's one hand up. Oh, learning. Hi, two thoughts. So quickly on the 10 year outlook, I guess I care less about the specifics, but that was something that I felt quite strongly about from our 2017 to 2020 era. I do think that in light of all the big capital investments we made, it's important to have kind of longer term horizon, but I will leave it up to staff to figure out what gets approved versus what is just an outlook. Going back to the portal housing language, can we go back to that slide please, or the page? So having watched the planning commission deliberations on this and talked to some of the planning commission members and then my thoughts on it, my understanding of why they were pushing so hard for full of housing to be managed in the CIP is because of the lack of long range strategy and then the lack of long range financial planning associated with it. And I think they wanted the CIP to be the mechanism given the conversation on the charter. I guess I would ask staff to think more about a better articulation of long term strategy and then the associated money needed to execute that strategy and solve for that rather than solve for it mechanically through a financial policy document. Does that makes sense. I'm sorry you the dog is noisy. A more coherent long term strategy and then the financial plan to execute that strategy. That's actually the crux of their feedback. They were trying to use the CIP as the mechanism to get that rather than, right? My opinion is, I don't know whether we want to bog that down in a financial policy document. And so, especially if there's charter implications, I care more about an articulate long-term strategy. And then what what if the finances needed to execute that strategy? So it would just remind us to focus on that, rather than debate does it belong in financial policies or not? That's my understanding from the planning and commission discussions. And my personal take too. Yeah, the way that I read this language and the financial policy, I'm in agreement with that. And I think that the way that I read this, that's what this financial policy is instructing staff to do is to create that long-term strategy and the funding plan and present it with the CIP. I mean, part of what the planning commission also highlighted was that the CIP has a little bit more of a public platform and more public engagement than the operating budget. Like the affordable housing fund is in the operating budget, but it doesn't really get a lot of, it doesn't get a spotlight there. So I think that's yeah, I think that's what this financial policy sort of instructs us to do. And I agree with what Caitlin just said, we have been a little stuck on this argument, does this belong in the CIP or not? Now with this policy statement, we move past that argument. Now we will present it concurrently with the CIP, so we can see it all together and do responsible financial planning for affordable housing. And we just move past that argument about whether it's in the CIP or not. But yeah, but I believe, right. And I take all of that and then I also agree with LUDDIs, you know, comment that we want to make sure that it's not just coming. Here's what the Affordable Housing Fund is. Here's the, you know, kind of operating budget going into the Affordable Housing Fund, but here are affordable housing needs and how are we thinking about building the funds and awaiting those needs, which is I think the conversation that the Brandon Commission has been. And I think HHS has a lot of that long term, there are, I think they're already doing a lot of long term strategy and funding planning. I think we just need to see it in the same format that we see the CIP on that six-year budget. I don't know how we do that yet. I don't know if we have a project sheet for it or I'm not sure yet, but I think that's in my mind that's what we need to see is we just we need to see it on a six-year budget and we need to see what the unfunded needs are and, you know, and have it all presented the same way that we present the CIP, but not even though it's not necessarily in the CIP, right? Yeah. That's what I'm thinking so far. Yeah. Just having learned this this morning, that yeah, that's what I'm thinking. And maybe a way to think of it, letty and Aaron and everyone is, they'll be presented together in a unified way, but your ordinance that you actually vote on will note the multi-year planning in the Affordable Housing Fund. So it'll be kind of technical in the background, but the way we'll be presenting it and thinking about it will be in a unified way. Does that make sense? Yes, I got yes. setting ADUs, this is the associated cost and then we're going to have to figure out how we get to that cost or you envisioning. Here's the funds, here are the funds that are going to be added because of various projects making contributions to the funds and here are the existing sort of needs versus the projected needs. That's that's the work that we have cut out for us. We have to figure out how we present all of that. Yeah. Does that mean we need to capture that? Yeah. I read the doubt. Follow the CIP is that when you see it in the budget ordinance, it all gets rolled up into those tables. There's only three or four tables. And those tables are classified by funding source. So if I picture that, the affordable housing, the whole fund and the program being rolled up into one table, the table might not really tell you very much. So yeah, I think they don't have to be more like project. Yeah. But you based on what can I do? You're going to be. Yeah, can I? Hello, can I chime in? Sorry, I don't think we need to solve it. I don't think we need to solve it here. But I guess I agree with Aaron that like I want the strategy, the priority, the initiative, what are we going to call it like preservation of expiring units, development of new affordable housing, whatever that list of initiatives is, and then what we project the cost to be over that six or ten year time period. And I think we can probably use the affordable living policy that's going to come to us as the starting point of what those priorities and initiatives should be. So we don't need to solve it here exactly the format, but we have a good mechanism for it, given the work underway. Right. Anyone else have their hand raised? Okay. Anything else before we move on? There is nothing else on the agenda, just general business wants to share. I'm very glad. I just have one thing and I didn't come up in this meeting, but regards to our December meeting and schools to have can probably help with this one. This is the first year that our budget falls under the collective bargaining agreement that the school division has to adhere to. So I just wanna make sure that everyone's aware that going into that December 2nd meeting, there are certain things that are part of that agreement and I'll let Peter and Christian explain what those things are. Yeah, thanks, Mary Beth. I think the big items that are gonna be the most costly are things that we've always done for the last several years. In fact, let me back up. The first is the step. Everyone gets an annual step in Greece in their pay and that is something that we've done every year for the last six years. And then in addition to that, we do a cost of living adjustment. The cost of living adjustment that was negotiated, just to remind everyone, was based on the CPI in October on October 15th. So we took the October 15th CPI. And so why this might be good information for you as well, which was 2.5%. I will say, I believe in the end that that will be likely less than we would have normally given, because we've always made the, we've always communicated to our employees that any extra revenue that comes through the budget is always poured into a cost of living adjustment, but we are going to adhere to the CPA,, or CBA, the way that it's been written. So that means about a 5% on average boost for all of our employees. So the steps about 2.5% and then about 2.5% cost the living adjustment. In addition to that, some of the other drivers that we have economically, and you'll hear about these on Monday as well, Monday the 2nd, are things like, you know, we do a 1% match for our 403B contributions now for all of our employees that participate. And hopefully that will stabilize over time, but this will be the second year of that going in. Bless you, Kristen. And then some additional things that were kind of one-off items that are not gonna be big economic drivers are in there as well. But the big movements for us or the cost of living adjustment, the step, and the 1% match. So those will be significant. And then we will be up for a renewal just by the way. This coming year of the classified staff collective bargaining agreement, the way that we have structured the negotiation process is the classified staff. And that's everyone who doesn't have a license to be in the system. So think license like a license to be a school counselor or license to be a teacher or a social worker. And then classified staff are folks that catch theory workers, food service, etc. Their contract is set to expire at the end of next year. So we'll start renegotiating their contract this spring for the following year after that. And then the certified staff or the licensed staff will have their contract renegotiated in two years. I would anticipate that there will be additional things that come from those negotiations, likely more tied to working conditions as opposed to salary and benefits. At this point, in terms of the economic impact, particularly, I think we're perhaps at for at least the foreseeable future, the threshold for cost drivers with relative to pay. So those are some things that we're going to be on the hook for. And again, those are things we've always done. So that's good news. Again, I'll just reiterate for purposes of being redundant, you know, our biggest challenge is we're going to have to hire between six and eight new people to manage the growth in our schools. So that on top of that 5% for just employee compensation is going to mean we're going to need quite a bit of money from the council. So thank you. Anything else before we wrap up? Can I ask one question just on the population growth? It's still early to know what's going to happen, but did the student and we never want to lose kids from our school district, but did this student population growth increase, take into account any like potential enrollment losses? No. In fact, we're seeing only growth over the next 25 to 30 years. We have a very high likelihood of opening school next year with 2900 students. students and during the pandemic just by contrast in 2021 we were in the neighborhood of 2490 so over that period of time that's almost a 400 student population growth we're getting back to well we're exceeding what our pre-pandemic numbers were so it's also important to note that we did cut a lot of staff during the pandemic because we didn't have the need. So we're actually bringing back staff that we had, not the same staff, but we're bringing back staffing that we had pre-pandemic. Okay. Any other thoughts or comments before we go? You run a good meeting there, Vice Chair. I guess my first one. Let's go. Thank you. Hey, just to be clear, we're out 10 minutes before 930, Marybeth. So perhaps, just, perhaps, just, you might need to run these in the future. I want to just see. I'm just really proud. Thank you. Okay. Well, thank you everyone. Do we need a motion to adjourn or we can just send? Looking. I'll, I'll make the motion to adjourn. Second. Okay. We are adjourned. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Goodbye. Thank you everybody. Bye bye.