the best example that i can think of from quite a ways back aside from the ones where it said peter warfield discussed his opinions about such and such was on a heated item in the past which had to do with an rfid issue. in which the participants got not a single word of summary in their own minutes including the aclu and the electronic frontier foundation which was opposed to the implementation of rfid. and the public was given five words or less in some cases of sentence fragments to summarize what they said. in my case, peter war field, process used to consider rfid. that was the entire entry for what i had spent three minutes discussing march 4, 2004. i think that mr. herrera's history starts right from the very beginning of this tenure as city librarian, when he set up a so-called technology and privacy advisory committee to look into the question of rfid, the advisebility of rfid installation which people thought was intended to justify it. there, there was initially, no inclusion at all of public comment in the committees meetings it was not strictly required by sunshine. eventually,