Youre watching our 2 International Coming to you live from the russian capital where its just turned 9 am welcome to the program. U. S. And the taliban are poised to sign a peace deal which may bring washingtons the longest war to an end the deal is expected to be negotiated on saturday or in the coming days what the u. S. Initially protected as a major success has now outstripped 4 president ial terms are to scale up and look back at the years of war. Back in 2003 u. S. Officials were telling a story of success when it came to afghanistan listen to Donald Rumsfeld were at a point where we clearly. Major combat activity to a period of stability and stabilization and reconstruction. Activities but 17 years and 4 president ial terms later one of the great powers of military history is about to sign a peace deal with the taliban warlords theyve been fighting all this time and the peace treaty looks an awful lot like outright surrender so 1st we have to be realistic and proud of our gains
Were covered up. We covered technical edits yesterday and those were edits where the staff and the Committee Members made edits. Those edits did not substantially change what was written. In most cases, it made it clear to the reader what was intended. Yesterday, there were several times where we had to stop what we were discussing because it needed to be discussed or deliberated in the public forum or Public Meeting today. When we get to those points, i will turn it over to the chair and she will discuss and handle that discussion. After you all come to a consensus, or dont come to a consensus, we will have a vote for what is going to go into the final report. We will start with the table of contents and page one. The edits that were made were approved by the general, as we move to page four, once again, those edits were approved yesterday because they did not have any substandard change to the report. Now we are on page six. Once again, we have no substantive change to the report of
Is the best way for the port to consider. And they should show us the nuance and gray areas but we will look at that. But i dont think were going to have a big philosophical discussion of maritime versus other but it will be nuances. I would hope that. But when i look at the criteria i dont see anything that ponies to maritime. Points to maritime. So all evaluation criteria will get points. The reality is they may impute it. But it is not a requirement from the pointing perspective. On page 12 of the staff report, we outline the scoring criteria with more detail than we saw on the slides. And if you look at 1b and 1e under quality of Design Development submittal, 1b talks about Performance Trust objectives which includes maritime and 1e calls out this balance that commissioner makras is pointing out. I agree it doesnt talk about how they are weighted but maritime is called out. So how many people are going to be on the panel. At least four. And its in the waterfront plan or include jus
At the criteria i dont see anything that ponies to maritime. Points to maritime. So all evaluation criteria will get points. The reality is they may impute it. But it is not a requirement from the pointing perspective. On page 12 of the staff report, we outline the scoring criteria with more detail than we saw on the slides. And if you look at 1b and 1e under quality of Design Development submittal, 1b talks about Performance Trust objectives which includes maritime and 1e calls out this balance that commissioner makras is pointing out. I agree it doesnt talk about how they are weighted but maritime is called out. So how many people are going to be on the panel. At least four. And its in the waterfront plan or include just a moment. I saw that. But is four a good number . Dont you usually need an odd number . Well theres scoring so i mean if there was a tie i guess having a fifth would be good. And we left it open. But at a minimum it has development expert, port advisory member and pe
Maritime. Points to maritime. So all evaluation criteria will get points. The reality is they may impute it. But it is not a requirement from the pointing perspective. On page 12 of the staff report, we outline the scoring criteria with more detail than we saw on the slides. And if you look at 1b and 1e under quality of Design Development submittal, 1b talks about Performance Trust objectives which includes maritime and 1e calls out this balance that commissioner makras is pointing out. I agree it doesnt talk about how they are weighted but maritime is called out. So how many people are going to be on the panel. At least four. And its in the waterfront plan or include just a moment. I saw that. But is four a good number . Dont you usually need an odd number . Well theres scoring so i mean if there was a tie i guess having a fifth would be good. And we left it open. But at a minimum it has development expert, port advisory member and person representing city or regional interest. We tho