 Coastal flooding is absolutely a canary in the coal mine. We're seeing an increasing awareness. I think we're also seeing an increasing acceptance of that, especially at the local government level. So while there still may be debate in terms of climate change and issues here nationally, local communities have to budget for and ensure that their infrastructure is functional after a flood event. And so they're thinking about this stuff now. Up in Alaska, for example, we have multiple communities that are realizing they need to relocate out of the floodplain entirely, but they are finding several hurdles when it comes to federal policies working nicely with each other. Norfolk, Virginia just recently passed a plan looking out to the year 2100. If we have a scenario, let's say, that the oceans rise six feet by the year 2100, what does that mean to a community? And if we don't start taking actions now, it will be folly for communities to try to do that within a short, compressed timeframe of a couple years. I think overall, we are seeing increasing awareness, but there is absolutely lots of work to be done. We're still drawn to coastlines. We want to recreate, we want to live near water, and so we have new people coming in near coasts that don't understand the hazards. So there becomes a public awareness issue. Think about the length of time it would take to relocate a neighborhood, to relocate an entire community from where it's at now to a new location. We're beginning to see communities and states thinking about it. Really the best examples you have of community relocation happen in the Midwest. They really achieve what we're trying to get to with the buzzword of the day, and that's resiliency, right? Resiliency is when a flood happens in a community, and when the governor tours that community, just like they did last month in Darlington, Wisconsin, the governor looks in brown and says, where's the damage? And the police chief is touting all the mitigation that they've done. That's where we need to go. The Association of State Floodplain Managers is a national organization, and so any of our members that are facing increasing flood risk anywhere in the country, we want to make sure that we're working with them, we're helping our members, we're helping our chapters. But the areas that I think are facing the increased flood risk first are where you have the combination of sea level rise but also land subsidence. So, for example, the Chesapeake Bay Area with Norfolk is one of those places. Coastal Louisiana is another of those places, and actually another place that we're seeing a lot of impacts is Coastal Alaska. We're supportive of all kinds of initiatives to incorporate things like natural defenses. Half of ASFPM's mission is to preserve, protect, and enhance the natural functions of flood plains. Natural defenses are something that kind of predate humankind in their nature's way of buffering the effects of these kinds of storms and flood events. Sometimes you can use those by themselves and get good storm and flood protection. In other cases, you can use those in combination with what we would call gray infrastructure or built infrastructure. We have areas in the country, in the coastal areas of the country that have long supported protecting their natural features and then others that decide that they want to have homes right to the ocean's edge and develop every square inch that they have. So, again, we just have a wide variety of opinions in communities, but I do think we see an increasing rediscovery of some of these natural benefits that we have when it comes to things like mangroves and natural shorelines and those types of things. The problem with our increased urbanization is certainly this disconnect with nature and with our natural systems. We have to coexist with this planet or else we will be on the losing end. I can guarantee you that. We have, though, I think a lot better technologies and especially visualizations where perhaps using and marrying technology we can forge a better bond by showing simulations, by showing the impacts in great detail and some of the benefits of our natural systems. The issue of whether or not to rebuild is something that plays out in communities, especially after every single disaster. Typically, the political inclination is to rebuild as quickly as possible with as less pain and trouble as possible, right? Because from a social standpoint, we want to reduce and eliminate the misery and suffering of our citizens. There are 22,000 communities participating in the national flood insurance. Every single community in the NFIP has a code requirement that says if you're substantially damaged in a flood, when you rebuild, you have to rebuild to a higher requirement and a higher level. You may feel a little pain now in rebuilding or not even being able to rebuild here, but ultimately you're going to be safer. And we do see communities making that decision. Specifically within the insurance policy, there's a key feature. And in NFIP policies, it's a requirement and it's called increased cost of compliance. That is a coverage that helps pay for the cost of rebuilding to a higher standard. And so that's a feature of flood insurance policy that everybody should have as well. We use the taxpayer argument quite often when we talk about the overall federal disaster policy in this country. We seem to provide greater incentives to build in risky areas and then come after a disaster and pay for those decisions, then we do preventing that in the first place. And so again, from a national perspective, we've got to do a lot better than we are now. The number of disaster supplementals that Congress is dealing with right now has skyrocketed in the last five years. What once was seen as an outlier event like Katrina, we're having these major events now every two and three years. And so at some point, we will be unable to afford to continue with the policies that we have now. We're going to have to take a different path.