And in cooperation, there was an agreement back then we're all five of us, decided to kick in $50,000, to hire a consultant to relook at this whole mess that we've gotten ourselves into. Part of that was working very closely with the state engineers office on kind of a new approach to dam design or dam, I should say, design criteria, which is based more on well, we'll get to that in a second. Sorry. So anyway, so we reviewed all the existing information. And we wanted to determine if additional modeling was needed, I wanted to get with the state engineers office and kind of get the Feds out of the picture because of the standards that they were bringing, and develop some kind of potential cost sharing proposal for achieving these, these improvements. And I think that's where it collapsed last time. So Kelly, the next slide. So the results of that study, and again, this was done in cooperation with attack state engineers office in seh. But the state had kind of a different approach that was more based on instead of just kind of setting a particular design event storm event, it was based on looking at probable failure modes, the consequences of that failure, and potential mitigation measures. And putting that data into almost kind of a matrix where there was a bit more of a sliding scale there was more more nuanced in the way in the in determining the improvements that are required to meet the rules of that state engineers office. So the results of that study and I have that study back there, it's 564 pages. Where that b two, B three and B four all have a low failure likelihood with a high probability We have loss of life and property damage. And it's that low failure. likelihood. That's the key part here, right? So generally speaking on these dams are very robust. And it's going to take a really large storm to overtop earthen embankment so that it might fail. Some of them only overtop by a foot or two, right? Some of them that they all function right up to pretty close to the PMI for the probable maximum flood. And so that calm those combination of factors kind of allow the state engineers often say, Well, you don't have to improve this to pass the PMF. Because there's things you can do to mitigate this. And those those mitigation measures were a flood early warning system, which consists of rain gauges and depth gauges, and it's real time and, and people like us can, can look at that, and then do things from that day to evacuations, road closures, things of that nature, and emergency action plan, we've all bought into an operations and maintenance plan. So, though, that was all good news, right, so then we immediately were able to kind of start focusing on the solution and what it cost sch was also under contract to prepare a cost share model that was based on that was based on really a quantification of the risk in terms of property damage and threat to human life. And that's generally expressed as a kind of a depth and velocity. So the higher the velocity, the flow, the more dangerous dangerous it is. And of course, the deeper it is, is also dangerous. And so those generally go into the factor. So this model took into account every piece of property affected by this dam break. And it was a huge, a huge model. And so at the end, we got results from that which seemed consistent with my experience dealing with this kind of thing. And develop kind of some specific proposals for meeting the new requirements of the SCO operations and maintenance. We determined that we wanted to a create a fund so that we don't have to go through this again in the future. And if, if we were to put some money in escrow, if you will, we would be able to use that money to make a major repair to one of the dams say the spillway cracks up breaks up, it needs to be replaced, there's a concrete spillway on b two is almost 200 feet wide. And we kind of arbitrarily came to the number of a million dollars or $1.2 million for that, based on what we thought a couple of major repairs might might cost. These percentages right here, those come out of the model. And basically these are the numbers that it was determined based on damages to those towns. Now we're immediately downstream of the embankments. And if they were to fail, Wellington would get wiped out, you know, there's no other way to say it. That breach event would just not have as much impact on Larimer County or Fort Collins, because of further downstream flood wave like this kind of attenuates as it moves downstream, and 10 with as well. So these were the numbers that were based on that really kind of a financial damage model to determine how to break out the cost to the various participants. So these numbers apply or proposed to apply to the creation of this fund. And to the emergency action plan, the additional costs for that and the annual operations and maintenance as well. The flooding of the well. We're basically going to glom on to let Larimer County's existing they call it an early flood warning system. And the capital expenses for including the monitoring that we need. And then computer power for that is about total of 100 grand. So we split that one five ways. So 20. So we we might have touched on this in the budget discussions. But we did knowing that this was out here, we went ahead and put it in the CIP and the five year plan in the budget. So it's in so these numbers right here, which are the results of all those calculations that we just went through, are in the budget, and they haven't changed since then. So you can see that, you know, the total cost to us over the next five years. Is that $487,000 number that will be the time that this fund is established. And the idea is that that they'll bury interest. And we won't need any more contributions to that. The only cost after this five year span would be the operations and maintenance costs, which you can see is the third line there. It's on the order of 1212 or 13,000. A year for that. And that's, that's kind of it. So where this is at right now is that the some of the attorneys for the communities have been working on a draft agreement between the participants to make this happen, basically, and we've gotten the draft here fairly recently. Dan's reviewing it, all the attorneys are reviewing it, all the TAC members are reviewing it. But right now, it looks like what we've agreed to, or I would say, where we ended up with where we ended up with the TAC anyway. And so wanted to bring that and then see if you guys any questions or wanted to know more.