you, Madam President, while I was clarifying with member Johnson, because I know she posed original question to myself as well as HRD, so just want to make sure who she was posing that specific question to. I don't have a problem answering the beginning of that question relative to being one of the key sponsors on this ordinance. I think the intent of this ordinance, particularly as we look at the diversity of housing, and I do understand your concern, member Johnson, as we look at the multiple ranges of am I and how we protect those levels, what I would say, specifically for this pilot ordinance, though, is different from other abatements as well. This pilot ordinance, and kind of the premise behind it, this is a tool that is generally used by smaller developers, and this ordinance was pushed forward, particularly for minority smaller developers as well, to have the ability to be able to get some of the same incentives that others enjoy. So when we talk about a pilot ordinance that already exists on the books that requires light tech and what we're talking about deep affordability of 30% what member Snyder, or I'm sorry, not member Snyder, but director Snyder was talking about, when we talk about the barriers that exist, particularly for smaller developers and minority developers, they don't have the access to capital to be able to do some of those projects to the requirements, and knowing that's coming from the Michigan State Housing Development Authority is that when those folks go to get those light techs, and as you talk to other developers, particularly minority and smaller developers around the Country, if they have had no experience building affordable housing before, but want to get into the development arena to build what their passion is for affordable housing. It is difficult because of the financing, and they generally build in areas that are not considered to be walkable neighborhoods. So for instance, let's just say if it's on coachable in d4 not to throw and say that specifically, but coachable in d4 or whether that is going to be on Joy Road in d7 those are not what are considered walkable neighborhoods in some aspects, particularly pertain by HUD and Mister for light tech. And be able to qualify for them because we are still working on building our commercial corridors here in the city of Detroit, where folks have access to do everything within one within one mile of their home. And so to fully answer your question, and talk about being open to capping it, per se, at 30, I think that's difficult, because also when we talk about smaller and minority developers, each one faces different challenges. So there may be a smaller developer that may have more access to capital, or there may be a smaller developer that has had a greater relationship with the CDFI in the city or our community, and they have the ability to have a little bit more restraints put on them, and saying that, okay, we may not want to do 70% market rate. We may want to do, you know, 60% market rate. But I think for me, the flexibility in that, I think it depends on the developer. And I'm just saying when we talk about those conversations initially, because I know I had opportunity even talk about member waters. We talked about that the AMI as well. I think it really depends on developers, and this tool, I believe, needs the diversity to be able to bring some of those smaller developers projects into fruition. Thank you, Madam President.