because our revenue money would be going up in that sense, and that would lead to less excess summicoming back t city. or the property taxes would have to go down, which we think is unlikely. or the state would have to basically say thanks, san francisco. you're going to subsidize everybody else's -- yeah, all of those things sound unlikely. well, last thing i'll say, it seems to me that, you know, this is a inequity that, you know, we're getting screwed here as a district, and it's a fu fundamental challenge for a district that is in a city that's growing tremendously with revenue, and we're not getting any additional funds as a result of that to address the cost of living challenges that our educators are facing that comes with living in a city with growing inequality. so it seems to me that whatever happens this year in terms of the distribution of it, that there's a very strong case that this money on an ongoing basis should come to sfusd, not to the county. and that that would help to address i think some of the -- i mean, build in inequity that has us getting 33%, which is way less than anyone