All right. So again, kind of understanding, you know, the variety of areas, you know, where this was gathered. And so that included, you know, included community, which was, you know, public comment of various groups we had, the mayor's was one of the staff liaison for the mayor's Public Safety Working Group. We had, there were multiple city meetings on the topic, and the BIA councillors listening sessions, there were a number of, in an ever number of direct conversations, just, you know, had the community through various roles in that capacity. We did hear from, you know, actual members of the groups, and that would be the same thing through direct observation or direct interactions. There were a number of others for media articles and statements that were provided to that that was taken into consideration, public statements during meetings, you know, those types of things. And then the final group, you know, that served as a valuable source was staffing, and that was through direct interactions with them to kind of find out, you know, for ones that had been there longer, it's like, how was this gone? What if some of the issues been that you've experienced? You know, what are some things that you don't think are clear that you wish were, you know, and essentially, just, you know, what are the if you had to, you know, the ability to wave your hand, what would be different about this, you know, that you think would have an impact. And then the other piece with a staffer, obviously, staff that aren't with us anymore, as its historical data through looking back through meetings and minutes, and like, those types of things from previous, like gatherings of this group over time, just to kind of watch how it developed, if there were anything that kind of trends or patterns with, you know, like this, if the conversation went in a certain direction, or kind of, you know, sort of to how we got to here. You know, the issue themes, I tried to sort of capture some of them, you know, that the bigger ones that were fair, you know, that did seem to be fairly common. And so one of the biggest ones across the board for at least for, you know, for community and members, I think, is who does what? And then as we just stated, it's like, Wait, it's like, what's a review panel? I didn't know that they did that. Like, I thought that happened somewhere else. Like, that was certainly one that was noted. You know, then you also had our public facing group. You had the staff group, within civil rights that did investigations, internal affairs, you know, also this investigation, so it was just kind of, I think it's actually just really even confusing, you know, understandably so, you know, where are these different responsibilities existed? And in the event that, you know, like, you wanted to directly address any of these, or you had questions about it, where do you go, you know, if there's any, you know, any of four places, and again, if some of the groups aren't public facing, are they made publicly available? How do you have questions on, you know, their operation answer. The other one was access to data. And this is, I think this was one that we, you know, we hear from a lot, you know, a number of avenues, both community and with members, which is just, you know, like, we want to know more about x. And, you know, and having to run things through staff, you know, and wait for stuff to compile things can be frustrating. And I was like, Well, look, it's like, we need to have more direct, you know, like a hands on experience, so that we can observe things firsthand, as opposed to kind of sitting back and waiting for you and bring us something and kind of guiding us along. I think, especially given just like the changing environment, that's something that's not necessarily surprising that people want to see things directly, in order to, you know, to form decisions and, you know, evaluate something effectively, there was also the transparency of the process. And I think one of the biggest issues with that is the fact that, you know, when this change happened in 2012, you had a public for kind of a split off from the community roll into a public facing commission that was meeting, but then you also had this Administrative Review process that was split into one that just by definition, it's an internal process, but there wasn't a piece that was ever, like, outward facing the community or had a reporting back function, which was, like, certainly created, I think, some some frustration with not knowing more about that part of the process. Another one, just meaningful involvement in the process, kind of feeling that, you know, you're putting in the time to, you know, to show up and to do this work, you know, and like, what do you, you know, what are the results? Like, what can you hold on? What can you show everybody that you've done, you know, from this time that you've, you know, you've committed, it's like having, you know, can you point to a policy that was changed and you point to say that you were on a certain amount of panels and you reviewed these and identified, you know, these policies and it was really something where it came back to that discussion with the commissioner on you know, it's it's like, well, what is six That's even look like which is fairly hard to answer in the current structure, it's, you know, is it that you had x amount of speakers is it that you did X amount of research and study, you know, we just there really hadn't ever been that conversation, which is something that's definitely that's not a good situation to be in, especially in our current time when it's, you know, that work is important. And so being able to measure the effectiveness of everybody involved in it is important as well. And then simply coming back down to just the effectiveness of oversight. You know, like, and I think this is one that goes across the entire group, whether it's community, whether it's members or former members, and then whether it staff is just, you know, the feeling that the feeling of effectiveness, or ineffectiveness is a constant. You know, that's something that I think it does weigh very heavily on people where if you're spending this time, whether it's to attend a meeting, whether it's to be part of, you know, a board or advisory board, you know, in any capacity, not just this, you know, or if it's staff spending hours and hours reviewing body cameras, you know, where the body camera footage, you know, conducting interviews, just, you know, like compiling information for an investigation, you want to feel like all of that is moving in a direction, that's, you know, that's having an impact that you can see, and that it's making a difference. Moving into the goals over form, again, that one that I touched on is sort of the overarching theme here, it's providing a meaningful role for community in the police oversight process. This involves creating a clear mission and authority for the community community role, you know, having this idea where it's sort of like, well, there's some overlap here, and there's overlap here, it just, it doesn't lead to a, you know, a system where they're, you know, people are operating with a lot of confidence, as far as what, you know, what is our authority? I mean, that was an that's become a question. We've heard a lot more from a lot of various different, you know, various groups, because it just wasn't spelled out, I think, in the way that people had hoped. maximising the transparency, the oversight process. I think, as I said, just the Administrative Review process of any investigation, whether it's for city staff, or for officers, it is an administrative process, and it's not allowed that can occur in a public space. However, that doesn't mean that there can't be some effort to, you know, bring some of that into the light, whether it's the individuals that are serving on a panel, whether it's just more information about the process itself. And so that's definitely something that, you know, that that was identified that I think, you know, there's certainly room for a significant improvement on that one, the final one, increasing direct access to data and opportunities for direct oversight. And that's the one that nobody wants to feel like they're, you know, conducting oversight by proxy, that they want to be directly involved in the process. They want to be reviewing something again, just it's it's one of those, especially now, and it's certainly understandable. It's like, you know, like, Well, what happened here? It's like, well, you know, this person can tell you, you know, the response that you will reasonably get a number of times like, Well, no, I'd rather see it. And so if there are opportunities to do that, that's something that we'd like to be able to call out, lift up and implement. Moving on to the actual, you know, so what are we proposing? What we are proposing is a unified Commission, the name that we chosen was a Community Commission on fees oversight, the name was fairly deliberate. And one of the issues that we've run into is that with any government entity, you end up with a bit of an alphabet soup situation with all of the acronyms that exist. You know, that's, that's avoidable. And in terms of, you know, one of the things I think we had to answer a number of times, it's Well Wait, who's community whose staff who's MPD? Who's this? And so by naming it the Community Commission on police oversight, there was a deliberate effort to put community first A for clarification, but be just for the purposes of ownership so that it's clear who you know, who that responsibility, or sorry, well, you know, where are the responsibilities for this proposed group fall? So what you know what it is, as I said, it's a creation of a single community driven entity. And the work of the Commission will take place during public meetings, which provide an opportunity for residents to observe presentations, hear discussions, and provide public input. And then commissioners will also serve as the civilian review panelists, when we can be when please conduct review panels are convenient to review administrative investigations.