Vote mr. Whitehouse mr. President . The presiding officer the senator from rhode island. Mr. Whitehouse thanks, mr. President. May i ask unanimous consent that the pending quorum call be terminated. The presiding officer without objection. Mr. Whitehouse thank you very much. Mr. President , im here for the 90th time to urge my colleagues in the senate to take action on Climate Change. The science is clearly worthy of our trust and it is, indeed, time to wake up. The human contribution to Climate Change is no longer up for legitimate debate. We know that Carbon Pollution accumulates in the atmosphere. We know that Carbon Dioxide traps the suns heat. Weve actually known that since Abraham Lincoln was president. We know that the atmosphere and the oceans are heating up. We can measure that. Ocean acidification and Sea Level Rise are also measurable and they are caused by Carbon Pollution. These risks to our environment to our health to our economy and to our National Security are every we
Second. All in favor . Public comment in ray hartz that i would like to say that in the five years coming to the hearing this is the only time that i have ever heard anybody come back and vote to disclose anything, from closed session. And now, i find that really, really, and i find that really misty fying. Opposed . It passes 50. And on the agenda, the discussion of the minutes, of the last meeting. Any comments from the commissioners . Public comment . Commissioners ray hartz, director of San Francisco, open government, and i wholeheartedly support the approval of these minutes and it documents the efforts of both the commissioners and the commissioners to openly and honestly discuss my case before this commission. And i would like to point out on page 6 of the document where the commissioner keane expressed that the library was discriminate and went on in the last sentences is important, mr. Herrra, stated that the members of the public are not prohibited to make the Public Comment,
Be worth discussing briefly at next months commission meeting. We should be so luck y i mean, seriously, there may be implications depending on how that goes, as to the sunshine ordinance and how business is transacted here in the city otherwise. And so, it is an important matter, i do take it seriously, thanks. And items for future meetings . I think that mr. Chair, that mr. Pilpal was reading my mind because i was going to interest at our next meeting for those of us who were not around in 2012, that we take up and get a report on the status of the, the case that is before the court of appeals, on for the oral argument and relating to our challenging, various, matters in the sunshine, San Francisco sunshine ordinance. And if we could have a report from staff on the history of that . And also, get into the way that it looks at this point and there were a couple of questions that i would like to raise, at that time and so if we could just discuss the case, that could go, on and get som
Force that they cant name mr. Ginsburg, are you . I dont, i mean, the. And as i understand it. The problem that you are having with their naming mr. Ginsburg is that he was not initially named when this alleged violation arose. And that after, second hearing, they suddenly came out, and named him and so the whole question comes did mr. Ginsburg get a proper notification, so that he could go to the task force and say, hey, you should not name me and here is why you should not name me . Is that . No, i think that the question, and i mean, the staff raised the question before that it would be a violation of mr. Ginsburg procedural. And i understand that, and i dont think that is right, and i think that tonight you can certainly, if you feel that mr. Ginsburg nonwillfully, and engaged in a nonwillful violation of the sunshine ordinance, i dont think that you are precluded by the due process and if you think that mr. Ginsburg did not violation the sunshine ordinance at all but that someone
Violation the Commission Shall publicly announce this back and announce and may not include the findings of fact and law and fact, and therefore, the commission will take no further action on the matter. But i dont think that there is anything that preincluding the commission from referring this back to the task force, to name who, and on name a respondent, and who they believe properly should be named for this, for the decision to not to disclose this information. And you are telling the task force that they cant name mr. Ginsburg, are you . I dont, i mean, the. And as i understand it. The problem that you are having with their naming mr. Ginsburg is that he was not initially named when this alleged violation arose. And that after, second hearing, they suddenly came out, and named him and so the whole question comes did mr. Ginsburg get a proper notification, so that he could go to the task force and say, hey, you should not name me and here is why you should not name me . Is that . N