They missed my soliloquy. Right. Oh, they're live. Okay. Councilman Scott. >> Thank you. Well, I'm not talking Are we live? All right. Well, then K triple I and Chris Hicks are carrying it live. Can we please settle it down? I'm sorry if I helped do that. I was just saying, "Hey, you haven't showered today." So, I wanted to make sure I was on TV. Um it's really interesting to me that you know, I was ambivalent about this meeting, right? Uh but I do think a lot of new information came out. It's been lively and I think the community appreciated the the rhetoric today. So, I think the meeting has been beneficial. Uh you reminded me that the New York Times is working on a water story as well. Um that I suspect we'll read in the next couple weeks. Um I want to point out a couple things from my first conversation. There's no conversation [clears throat] today on the cost of expediting Inner Harbor if we move forward on the 28th. [clears throat] Is that correct? Is there any any conversation going on that says, "Hey, we want to design it. We think it's going to come online in November of 29, but if you want to spend an extra $5, we can move that to July of 29." Is there any any conversation about that? >> No, there isn't. No, there isn't. Is that a possibility or is that Is that a possibility? Really not in a position to talk for Corpus Christi desal partners per se, but you know, I would think all that's possibility, uh councilman. I guess my point is time. You know, you and I understand you can do it fast or cheap, but not both. Yes, sir. Cosmic cloud business, correct? Okay. Well, I would I would be open to to that dialogue if there is the potential for that. And I I don't want to get in the way of that the 28th contract, but I do think it's relevant that it if we had the if we move forward, that we should have the ability to deliberate spending more if it buys us time if that timeline works. That's all. Yes, sir. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Two other things I think no, number one, I have confidence the Texas Water Development Board is going to help us if we do move forward on the 28th. I think it's one of those in for a penny in for a pound. I think that's one of the reasons they've been frustrated with us is that they feel like they've helped us get to this point. And I do think I have I've not talked to anyone, but I do think that if we went to them and said, "Hey, we need one last tranche." But, they would be open to help us get there. And I appreciate the the work by the congressman to to look for federal grants cuz I think we all recognize that we do fuel the world and it would be nice if the state federal government recognized that and provided us some financial help, right? Um and I appreciate that those are ongoing conversations way above my pay grade. I do see that if there's any I I foresee a conversation on the 28th that says, "Hey, we need to slow this down because we need to get the final answers." And I would submit to this body that we have moved forward on Evangeline without the final answers, right? In fact, you sent us something this week that it's 60% design and we've got a picture of pipe that's laying on the ground. And so, I would see the vote on the 28th similar similar similar to Evangeline, which is we got time is of the efforts time is of the essence and we need to move forward. I just want to get lay that frame framework for future conversation. I think my last comment is that there's a lot of conversation we need to get to 76 million. And we like to use uh the wells at 36 and I think we've all articulated that that is not a long-term solution. That's a short-term to a mid-term solution. So, that we I don't want us to use the "Hey, we're going to add 36 million from the wells and that's part of our goal to get to 76 million gallons a day." When the reality is I think we're looking to use 36 million gallons a day while we can and need, but the long-term is to is to only use 20, right? The desal and a 20 at uh Owen Stevens. So, I would submit that if we're using the well field as part of our 76 million, we use 20, not 36. I think our friends from the northwest would prefer that to be zero, but they would much rather prefer we use 20 instead of 36 million gallons a day as we calculate the the ideal to get to 76 million gallons a day. That's it. Thank you, sir. Thank you, mayor. Great. Thank you, councilman. Um So, it's 10:39. It's 10:40. And for some of the comments made by multiple council members to say "What are we doing here today? It's a waste of our time. We could do this next week. We could do this on the 28th. We could do this." Water's an emergency every single day. Every day. And we have lost a year. That's 365 days. I will call another special emergency meeting if I feel like we need it. You know why? Because it's for our constituents. The majority who are not here in this room today. Because today I'm going to ask you all to keep the order, please. This is all live-streamed. You all can go back and rewind and cut and do what you want with it. I'm sorry. It is. They just said it was. So anyhow today is about accountability. Today is about transparency. Not one council member sitting up here has to be here. It is your option. So, if you feel it's a waste of time, don't come. But, what's important to me is that we are allowing the people to know exactly what is transpiring. Our responsibility is not to sit back and hope that timelines happen and hope that timelines are met. Our responsibility is to ensure that they are. So, calling this meeting is a part of doing exactly that. So, I respect what people have to say up here. For for people who didn't think this was a good use of our time, it's an hour and 40 minutes. Lots of great questions were asked. A whole lot of great questions. And if anybody read councilwoman this meeting agenda description, it's very clear. It is for the public. It is for you all to know exactly where we are today. So, there being no further business, this this uh meeting is now adjourned. Now, you can speak.