. >> the question is whether to include vezzulizations. my point of view before opening it up is again, to, miss tidwell's last point about the public comment, they will be a part of the archive record. we did not post them as potential drafts. there was our initial request to the consultants so we could appreciate the implications of several different options, which why we had 11 to begin with. my point of view would they not be included but be part of the archive that gets reference and people can visit them if they would like to. >> ok. then just a couple of other thoughts about things that aren't addressed specifically in the language of the report, but one is the final map itself. how should we incorporate that? should that just sort of be the first item or should it be referred to as an appendix or what have you? along the similar line, district descriptions, meets and bounds. again, we didn't make a specific reference in the report. i guess we just sort of thought they would obviously be necessary components of our time work product