Let me throw this out.

Sorry, Beth.

And they can catch up.

Yeah.

So there's got to be a happy medium.

Life is about compromise.

That is that is where I'm coming in today.

So what I what I'm going to suggest we do.

They're so nice.

What we suggest we do is you know, go to the white board, identify the the Mary.

There she is.

Good to see you.

Can we hear you?

She's on mute.

She is on mute.

I'm unmuted.

Okay.

Good.

Okay.

Want to be sure we didn't have any technical problems.

Um so we are debating whether or not the the approach we took in our in our effort is where we want to be.

And and I was just commenting that we've gone from a purely subjective approach where it's how we feel about stuff to uh a very objective approach that's time consuming and uh may not actually give us the results we want.

Um and you know, each each question has its own score, and is that really what we want?

And you know, we'd have to run it for 10 years before we actually got fine-tuned those scoring mechanisms.

So I'm proposing to go to the white board and try and come up with a with a hybrid kind of approach that provides some of the but still allows a lot of subjectivity in the process.

So if everybody's comfortable with that, I'm headed toward to the board.

Is there any way we can uh have actually maybe we can you can't can you see the board there?

This section of the board right away.

Yeah, lower okay.

So yeah, I I will try and unfortunately I've right handed, so I'll probably be blocking the view.

So let's identify the things that we think should score points.

So what's first and foremost?

I'll ask Jason Tony.

Big I'm thinking big categories.

So let me give you a hit.

That's a bet.

Eight.

It's always gonna be heads and bits for us because that's what's fully the OPAC.

Yeah.

Yeah, so so heads and beds is to me the top priority category here.

Can you probably can't see that, can you, Lene?

No, no, sorry, too far.

Okay.

Okay.

We'll talk about it.

Uh so the so what other categories of things we want to encourage with our LTAC dollars, you know, and we can talk about what we're spending it on now as a way to get to that because we're not really doing much of this.

I think bringing people into the community to spend money, yeah.

So um community impact, community impact.

Yeah, so um that's a little broader than I was looking for.

Um I'm gonna how how about community events?

Oh uh we can I'm just we may want to come back and change these, but let's start off there.

Uh what other categories of things do we want to fund?

What can you mean from the objective standpoint?

You can argue this anyway you want, but the first two metrics should typically always be heads and beds and direct economic impact.

Hey, one and two, and when those are good, all the others are good.

When those are bad, the rest become subjective and questionable, but that's again just basics.

So um direct economic impact from the from the uh event itself or the thing that's being being funded.

So um third would be indirect.

Um, and then after that, then your your roster of subjective, how do you how does this make you feel emotionally and community and vibrancy and all those things can be um sprinkled in, layered in, debated however you want.

But if you're just looking for your top three in-order metrics, and you will see this, you can hire 20 feasibility consultants to do all these L tax they do it all the time, and this will start always start with those three, and then they'll it'll flower out from there to what I call salt taste for your community with your size of community and and impacts, you know, what happens in Westport or what happens in PLUP or what happens on Yakima, you know, will vary after that.