May come to order . I consent that military can call resources, i ask unanimous chant that they recognized for ten minutes each during the question rounds, and without objection, so ordered. Before i begin and similar to the previous hearing on the 737 max, with the ceo of boeing testifying in october i want to explain that administrative manners regarding some documents we may use, i will be making two unanimous consent requests and reference to to document lists, list a, list be. First the documents contained on this to be our marked export controlled, apparently they stamp everything. We have been advised by house general counsel that they provide ample authority for us to release these documents. However, with regard to documents i will be making unanimous consent requests regarding the release of these documents, pursuant to the control act. Second, i will be making unanimous consent request to enter the documents on a list day into the hearing record. This includes additional doc
Contributor must be following the name, contribution amount of the major relevant contributor. You need to put the dollar amount after the name of the contributor and after that, you put the names of the contributors to that contributors. That is correct. What she points out here is you would not want to put the name of the contributors immediately after that because that would get in between the name of the contributor and how much money that person or entity gave. I agree. Its a good addition to add that language there in the first sentence. Ok. Those are all the amendments that i would suggest. Im glad to answer any questions about those or anything else in the regulations that you might have questions about. Just more broadly, stepping back for a moment, with this new ordinance and the regulations that are implementing prop f, how will the Ethics Commission be in a position to enforce this ordinance. Is there a data base where all land use matters so defined can be searched to know
Contributor and after that, you put the names of the contributors to that contributors. That is correct. What she points out here is you would not want to put the name of the contributors immediately after that because that would get in between the name of the contributor and how much money that person or entity gave. I agree. Its a good addition to add that language there in the first sentence. Ok. Those are all the amendments that i would suggest. Im glad to answer any questions about those or anything else in the regulations that you might have questions about. Just more broadly, stepping back for a moment, with this new ordinance and the regulations that are implementing prop f, how will the Ethics Commission be in a position to enforce this ordinance. Is there a data base where all land use matters so defined can be searched to know whether or not Entity Company x and properly made a contribution improperly. These ordinances are only as effective as the enforcement ability. Is the
May come to order . I consent that military can call resources, i ask unanimous chant that they recognized for ten minutes each during the question rounds, and without objection, so ordered. Before i begin and similar to the previous hearing on the 737 max, with the ceo of boeing testifying in october i want to explain that administrative manners regarding some documents we may use, i will be making two unanimous consent requests and reference to to document lists, list a, list be. First the documents contained on this to be our marked export controlled, apparently they stamp everything. We have been advised by house general counsel that they provide ample authority for us to release these documents. However, with regard to documents i will be making unanimous consent requests regarding the release of these documents, pursuant to the control act. Second, i will be making unanimous consent request to enter the documents on a list day into the hearing record. This includes additional doc
Planning commission that is not set fourth in code or in the charter. So theres no citation to make right. What about dish think they have adopted regulations like outlining. Im sure they have very elaborate provisions for how you seek discretionary review on someones project. Because again, it is just seems so discretionary review is hearing when a hearing is not required. I mean, if no one else is brought it to our attention or worried about it, its a fairly hefty part of the Planning Commission calender. Theres a fair amount of discretionary review hearings that they process all the time. I mean, probably it doesnt matter because im hug there are some that involve 5 million worth of construction. Anyway, i just dont have a citation for the regs so i cant really help. If there was someway to pin it to something a little bit more than just so my initial plan and approach for all of the 1. 127 definitions was just to have references to the planning code. Ideally those dont exist. They