someone would file a sunshine request with the sunshine task force, and the task force would conclude that we had committed official misconduct and would make a referral. that is exactly what the sunshine or dance task force did. -- sunshine ordinance task force did. the audit that the budget analysts conducted also had an extraordinary finding. a finding that, on average, city employees had to spend 1.9 task force hearings to get complaints against them adjudicated. on average, city employees had to go approximately twice to the task force. they could not go the first time to get it done. there were times when they were going more than two times. that is the average. that is not acceptable. it creates enormous inefficiencies. the task force needs to be able to manage its calendar, which it has not done. i think that the rules committee did a very good job in terms of selecting smart, good, hard- working people who can come to give a fresh perspective to resuscitate this task force. there was one recommendation of the rules committee with which i do not agree, which is the recommendat

the air force corporate process. and it has several different steps along the way, beginning at the action officer, going up through the one star, two star level, which is the board level. the council level is three star. and recommendations are presented to the chief and the secretary at the four star level. i was able to participate. my staff was able to participate all along the way. we were encouraged to make our inputs, and we did so. in fact, we exercised that encouragement rather vociferously inside the process. we did present alternatives to the air force, alternatives to the 13 pb as it officially came out. i think general schwartz has accurately described the process when he said that there were very difficult decisions for the air force to make. he encouraged open debate. i engaged openly in that debate and made my inputs. but in the end, the final decision is left to the chief and the secretary. and many of the recommendations and alternatives that we proposed were not adopted. but we respect the difficult

the army reserve is an operational force. it's highly successful and it's successful because of soldiers like sergeant burgess and other soldiers. >> we've been advised that you have -- how is that impacting your mission? >> the -- what i can tell you, sir is if you look at the figures it says equipment on hand for the army reserves, we're better than we've ever been. 86%. we're 66% modernized. the equipment that we have in a lot of cases is old equipment. now as far as our soldiers being able to do their job in iraq and afghanistan and other places, not an issue. because we make sure they're using modernized equipment in those theaters. where it impacts me is back home. it impacts me back home because now, and especially now that we've drawn out of iraq and we're going to draw down out of afghanistan, i'm focusing on home station training. how do i keep the soldiers trained at home so they're ready to go? and i need that modernized equipment back here. it's a morale factor. if you're a young soldier trained and equipped with

accepted by the united states air force. and i applauded that because it made a whole lot of sense. still does make a whole lot of sense. but the dilemma that we're in now is how do you make that transition that we start this year in fy-12 with the prohibitions on spending moneys in '13 to complete those actions. >> i hope as we move through the process and we're trying to respect you're stewardship of scarce dollars, that we see what that delay would do is really waste money or take money for planes that we know we're going to get rid of to maintain them and money that could be used in other places. in the same light, in nashville, the guard is preparing for a new unmanned aerial vehicle mission, which i understand the air force needs for that facility to assume. now, how will this one-year delay affect the capabilities in the time line for moving uavs into nashville? >> very similar situation. again, this was an fy-12 action d that is beginning. part of it involves the movement of c-130s from puerto rico to the air national

this talks about the task force's authority. i have to find the second part of that passed through these woods by saying, well, i got it, and the information with the authority, but what is it the ethics commission is supposed to do? i am left feeling this does not tell me, so i have to look at the ethics commission. 's authority, and we did not have something that just says you can and for somebody else's findings. that takes me back to feeling, or do began, commissioner, is a logical place -- the effect of the task force finding is to shift the burden. it brings it to us with a finding, without a work and a foundation that has been set, but we have to pick it up and do what is our job, which is to make a determination on our authority, and it is perfectly fair for us to do that, relying on the task force to shift the burden, which for anybody who had to go through this, you would know that as a big deal, the difference between you have to prove it or i have to prove it is quite meaningful and is respectful of the task force eff

as you recover, the force, will start filling personnel gaps we have had. and before you actually start to see increase readiness reporting from our moments of home station is going to be the equipment piece. that's two to three years from the time the equipment actually gets home, not from the time the units redeploy. our best estimate right now, based on 2014 draw down from afghanistan would be, sometime around 2017 is when we would start to see significantly increased reporting. i mention that 67% of our units at home station were degraded readiness. really what i was referring to was c 3, c 4, scale of one to four. units report the lowest level of readiness in manning, training and equipment. so 61% of the units that report degraded readiness as a result of short falls. not only do we have to get the equipment homen't . we have to reset the equipment, going through depots or replacing equipment destroyed. procurement process. depot maintenance process. our best estimate is two to three years, not from the time the marines come home, from the time the equ

, and also the strength of that force? at a time when there is consensus that our military needs to do more, frankly, the risks around the world, that we need to be more agile and responsive, i'm also concerned in not only looking at the 72,000 reduction in the army, but i would also like to have the same questions answered with respect to the 20,000 reduction of the marine corps as well, as well as the marine corps' decision to eliminate one maritime prepositioning squadron, which we've talked about at length before. at a time when we are increasing focus on the maritime dominated asia and pacific region, when the navy has approximately 30 fewer ships and subs than it has said previously our national security requires, and when the navy is failing to meet 39% of our combatant commander requirements for attack submarines, i also remain concerned for our navy about postponing the procurement of the virginia class submarine. i'm also concerned about the mismatch between our stated strategy that features an increased emphasis

the part of it is not a recommendation to the next task force, it is to the city. poor example, the charter says -- for example, the charter says it could be changed to provide 30 more days in total. as an example. >> just to keep it simple, i would say it's we're going to do -- if we're going to do additional time, that we do not kid into the minutia of what that would look like. -- get into the minutia of what that would look like. >> i agree. member melara: it would provide that task force with additional time in order to possibly have some decision making or some power over the hiring of the consultant or develop the work plan with a consultant. >> excellent. any others on the process? member melara: no. that would be the big piece. if we agree with having something with the consultants and how they're going to do their work, we definitely need to suggest a charter revision of some kind. >> the second paragraph speaks to something different. member melara: the one increasing the city department? that is different. that has to do with, i believe mr. pilpel wante

you should see it before the air force presented the budget proposal that substantially cut your force base on the claims that they have and they have not shown you. >> i agree, sir. as we have gone through this process, the thing that i have come to the conclusion is that the analysis that i have been able to see, the answer is sometimes important. the conclusion is important. as important are the initial going in assumptions and the methodologies used in the metric of what you're trying to measure. i do not think that is sufficient. you need to go back and look at the process of the methodology and assumptions. that is the thing that concerns me. how we got to some of that. >> i agree with you. i do not think these cuts in the air guard reserves is going to save us money. i think it is going to cost us a lot more. we saw how important they were to was in iraq and afghanistan. that is not a capability you can turn on and off like a switch. that is not even going into the continental u.s. i share the concern of a lot of the governors. they were not listened to. we will talk about that

i would like to bring that expertise and experience to the sunshine task force. i am a policy and procedure wonk, you could say. i've been a competitive parliamentarian at one point in my time. i serve currently at the parliamentarian for the alice b. toke lis democratic club and i have advised many entities in the past in best practices in finding ways to follow the procedures which -- i always advocate are never there to hinder or create pure -- bureaucracy and make progress not happen but are tools to make it happen in a fair way. do you have any questions? thank you. chairperson kim: thank you. next we have trevor mcneil and then hanley chan. >> hello, supervisors. my name is trevor mcneil. i'm a 30-year resident of san francisco and happen to be 30 years old. i applied for the sunshine ordinance task force in 2006 and am interested in serving again. i've worked abroad. i've worked for transparency international, an international organization that advocates for transparency around the world and helped set up experiments in lebanon. since then, i've been back h

the air force reserve is a leverage to make this happen. they will be there when called, prepared paired, trained and equipped. we are forecasted to reduce by 900 personnel. however, that figure is just the proposed fy-13 president's budget and is the tip of the iceberg. the loss are in specialties still essential to the total force an aircraft maintainer with 17 years of experience cannot become a cyber warrior with 17 years of experience overnight. the air force is losing the capability of 5,000 to 6,000 experienced and trained personnel. the alternative to these losses once again is to focus on the correct balance to adjust all three components mix to maintain crucial capacity. globally fielded in small numbers and highly responsive. there should be a more ro bust reserve component as a projection force. we can support the president's reversability plan, contribute to the nation's economic recovery and ensure the security of our nation and its interest. mr. chairman, members of the committee, senator cochran, i am honored to have served t

if we're restricted from gradually drawing down the size of the ground forces in the years beyond 2013, congress would be forcing us to reduce readiness. we would have to cut training. we'd have to cut equipment. all of that very needed to support the force. and, again, it would guarantee a hollow force. if we're limit fed in our abili to put health care costs on a sustainable track, then congress would be making all this more difficult to invest in new technologies that we believe are critical to the force we need for the future. i don't think any of us in the administration or on capitol hill want these outcomes. therefore, i would strongly urge the congress to work with us to reach a consensus about our defense priorities, recognizing the budget realities that we face, not the ones that some would like to pretend are not there. i understand from my own experience that congress has the right to question some of our decisions and to make changes. that right is inherent in the legislative process. the congress also has a responsibility to make sure that we protect a strong, national de

on the installations, putting forces out with employers and we're going to make that a cornerstone of our program. i can tell you today, it's working. in the past couple of years we've already put at least 1,000 soldiers that we know into civilian jobs in our force. there's many thousands of others we know have already used the portal on the web have gotten jobs and employers are telling us, and we didn't even know the soldier because the soldier used the technology themselves to do it, but the program is working. soldiers are happy. employers are happy. we've got a good force. >> thank you very much. i'll be submitting a few other questions for your consideration. so expect that. >> mr. chairman, thank you. general stenner and i have given to your staff some questions about reassigning aircraft that now based as keesler air force base biloxi, and i hope you can take a look at those and address a response to the committee as soon as reasonably possible. what we're concerned about is the readiness, of course, of an operational reserve and how that may be affected

but also i worry a lot about the health of our force. having said that, i also said earlier that i believe that we have the most resilient force that we could have ever imagined. 15 years ago if you told me we're going to remain -- we're going to be in combat for a decade and be able to keep our soldiers and family members with us, i would not have believed that. but as you look back and see how we've been able to adapt across the mill stair, but specifically in the army to meet the demands and keep our force with us and take care of our troops, i think that's quite impressive. i'm really concerned about our ability to continue to do that. i'll remain focused on that for the foreseeable future because as you well know, people is what the army is all about and so our ability to do that and keep faith with our soldiers and families is something i remain concerned about. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator ayotte. senator begich. >> thank you very much, madam chair. let me -- i have a couple broad questions then general breedlove, i have, as

between the guard and the air force. and then referencing the action that the house recently took to delay all this for a year. if you could apply that now back down to the a-10 situation. what is the -- what is the status of those negotiations? is this a done deal? is it a financial decision has been made? is there more consideration to be undertaken? >> very similar situation to tennessee. significantly different input from the air national guard. our input in the corporate process was to suggest alternative ways to meet the emer emerging strategy with a 10s. as you know play a crucial role in close air support, iraq an afghanistan. we have air guard a 10s in theater right now as we speak. but some of those suggestions were not accepted by the air force as we went forward. alternative missions were proposed for the unit at ft. wayne, indiana, and those are included in pb-13. the status of the negotiations between the council of governors and secretary panetta i think have concluded. although at any point in time the sec

this was not an easy issue for the task force to face. after a lot of research and reading and reading over and over and searching through the charter and all of the administrative code, under section 4104, it only speak to the executive branch. the sunshine task force is not of that. it was created by the voters. and actually, there is no mention that the sunshine or dance reports to visit -- to the executive branch at all -- the sunshine ordinance reports to the executive branch at all. that is what led us to ofeel tht it is appropriate to make those changes. >> i have the opinion of the city attorney here. >> is it opinion or advice? rex is a memo. how is that? -- it is -- >> it is a mammal. how is that? you guys are subject to it. -- >> it is a memo. how is that? you guys are subject to it. gregg's when research to see of this particular body was encompassing under the section that referred to it did not seem like it applied at all. brecht's i understand that is your opinion, but -- >> i understand that is your opinion, but on the boar

for the away game mission, i know that the army has taken the air force's position that the air force will support inner theater air lift, which is the mission that the c-23 and the c-27 airframe were designed to do any ideas or suggestions as to how we can address the domestic air lift? >> northcom is in a recent discussion with general jakoby, commander of u.s. northern command. he views looking at the homeland as a theater of operations, and i think his perspective will be very important in determining requirements for all homeland defense or homeland operations inner theater air lift in the homeland being one of those parameters. >> mr. chairman, thank you. >> thank you very much. gentleman, i thank you for your testimony this morning. and i thank you for your service for our nation. further questions? >> no, mr. chairman. i have no further questions. i do want to congratulate our panel for the leadership you're providing for our armed forces. thank you very much. >> i will be submitting some questions and as for your response. and now, the committee asks general stultz, admiral a

at the bottom of page 4 there are instances where the task force is one word. can we separate those? and there are actually three par graphs at the bottom of page 4. the first paragraph that starts on 5 and the paragraph on 5 that's "in decision." i would break those out and put those in a separate section following called community and media outreach. >> hold on, too many ideas at first so on the task force can you do a search for find all and then replace so that anywhere it's task force as one it gets replaced with task space force? >> ok. >> ok? you're good there. >> uh-huh. >> ok? continue? >> so there were three par graphs that i called out that i would put in a separate section to follow and obviously we number. >> so again, are they factualy incorrect? >> they're not factually incorrect -- >> it's just a speech preference? >> no, it's about collecting -- >> i understand that. your proposal is to rewrite, correct? >> not to rewrite. it's to take those three and put it in a different place to gather those concepts in just one place. >> hold that thought. e

they all have a niche in the sunshine task force. i am proud to say that it is still going and going strong. i served as chair of the sunshine task force for three years. i had excellent attendance. i do think for my priorities, we need a better outreach and education. i think the sunshine task force should craft its own sunshine training and not rely on the city attorney's training. is a difficult thing for employees to navigate -- not just because they do not know what they can give, what they have to cross it out. there should be a goat to guide somewhere -- go-to guide summer. will set up and find out what they need to comply with sunshine requests. it should not be as difficult as it is. i am a journalist. in the publisher of "the west side observer." i am committed to sunshine. i believe it is a civil rights. i look forward to working on that committee if you approve me. are there any questions? supervisor kim: the questions at this time. >> thank you. supervisor kim: next we have michael kwan. >> hello, supervisors. i am curren

i want to talk to you about the air force base. as the you know, there is an effort to relocate that. we have had conversation. and my big concern is based on the volume of movement of civilian force. these are my word. i see this as kind of a back door brac, without all the public process and the need. here is the real question. what i ask every one, every meeting i have. if you are the air force and wearing anything that indicates such you get these questions and i look for the answers. did the air force conduct a comprehensive analysis and assessment tole v lle validate cost savings. five years it is $169 million. when i say comprehensive, not just for the fiscal year '13. but for the spread. and then other services that may be affected? example a is joint training. and mobility center that the army uses to move people, the striker force. they use it. it is on air force base. air force base personnel participate in that effort. when you reduce down the force. the army is going to have to pick up a tab on this. i don't want to pit

they're in the air force budget. i have been assured there will remain sufficient funds and sufficient services to keep the 168th playing the vital role that it does. the decision whether to go from a 4-hour alert, which they're currently on, to something less than that, is a call left to general north, pak-af, with norad and northcom. i can't get into the operational decisions. but my concern would be that we have in the future as competent and capable a wing as we do right now. and so i watch very closely any attempts that would diminish their ability to perform the mission. i wish i had a bert answer for you than that. >> let me perhaps rephrase it. if, in fact, you did have to go to a reduced-hours operation, 12 hours, could you do the mission that you believe you have to do or that you're required to do there in the arctic, in the north pacific? >> again, the mission requirements are set by the war fighters. if they were to make that conclusion, the 12-hour alert would be sufficient for mission accomplishments, w

>> madam chair, from our perspective, the force demand is different on the navy as we withdraw out of land campaigns. we have sustained training our forces at a major combat level through this ten-year period. what you saw in this budget, we invested in training and depot maintenance, brought it up to 110%. we remain reliant on the funding and we see that it will take at least two to three years for a transition, perhaps longer for us to sustain readiness levels. >> madam chair, the difference for us is much as you saw after we came out of desert storm one and desert two. immediately following a combat -- a change in mission like we're seeing in iraq now, the actual requirement for air forces goes up in order to facilitate that retrograde, to cover with kinetic fires and isr, to reduce the risk for those ground combat soldiers and marines as they do that mission. and we are seeing that now. even as we are coming out of iraq act three months ago, our deployed fighter squadron was up to about 8 1/2. it is up to 11 1/4 now. that's much what we expect. also, on the lift side of the house,

>> before we go round and introduce ourselves, of like to thank the task force of compliance amendment committee for the very helpful information you provided to us in writing and for meeting with us here today. of afford to a productive conversation. we certainly on the commission are trying to do our best to figure out a way to really welcome your health and advise in that regard, so thank you very much. >> defied the had a comment on that, this has been a long process. we do appreciate the patience you have shown us in waiting for us to weigh in on this very important process, so thank you. >> would you like to introduce yourself? we can go around quickly, since we normally don't meet together. >> i am a member of the sunshine ordnance taskforce. >> i am hoping johnson, the chair of the task force. >> members will, the vice chair of taskforce. >> i am currently the chair of the compliance committee. and of like to express my appreciation for agreeing to meet with us after what has been several years of back and forth about some complex issues. >> i am paul of the ethics commission.

and there were almost 40 records that have been referred to by the task force. it was made the subject of a civil grand jury report. i don't know if you are familiar with it. over the course of that time, when those of us that spent a lot of time looking at it, each of these dismissals was based upon a set of regulations that did not apply to sunshine cases. the regulations that were followed by the staff and were limited by what the charter said they applied to. if they are going to hear sunshine cases, let them differently and have some process. the reasons aren't evident. sunshine cases are totally open. there is no secrecy collected. sunshine cases are pretty complicated because of the statute. you are using the wrong regulations, this is not official misconduct. ultimately, the case was dismissed by the commission. they are very different in one respect. the staff has the right to review the complaint that it has filed. with it, the executive director analyzes the information that has been blamed by the members of the staff, and he writes a report to the com

national guard partner nations have reduced the demand on u.s. forces, 22 partner nations have provided 11,000 troops to afghanistan. and 40 partner nations have provided over 31,000 personnel in support of u.n. peacekeeping operations. this year, we will celebrate 20 years of the state partnership program. and we look forward to continuing to work with theage utants general, the governors of our states, territories, commonwealths and the district to continue this innovative low cost small footprint approach to security cooperation for the future. each year, we continue to adapt our skills to better serve the nation's strategy. that is why this year we are instituting a threat based resource model for our counter drug activities that will direct funding to states pressing the most pressing narcotics threats to our communities. the breadsth of our skills allows us to take on new and emerging missions. i would like to address our most important asset as you have so aptly stated. our soldiers and airmen are the reason the guard has been so successful over

if we're restricted from gradually drawing down the size of the ground forces in the years beyond 2013, congress would be forcing us to reduce readiness. we would have to cut training; we'd have to cut equipment, all of that very needed to support the force. and again, it would guarantee a hollow force. if we're limited in our ability to put military health care costs on a sustainable track, then congress would be making all of this more difficult to invest in new technologies that we believe are critical to the force we need for the future. i don't think any of us in the administration or on capitol hill want these outcomes. therefore, i would strongly urge the congress to work with us to reach a consensus about our defense priorities, recognizing the budget realities that we face, not the ones that some would like to pretend are not there. i understand from my own experience that congress has the right to question some of our decisions and to make changes. that right is inherent in the legislative process. but congress also has the responsibility to make sure that we protect a strong

by the task force. this represents at least some of the views of the task force and try to incorporate them as best as possible host. >> this is an 11 member body. people approach us from all over, especially during election time. we have one person, one person who is working on this. the burden that is placed on the staff is that we do this repeatedly, so we don't have a staff. i am just trying to -- mr. grossman is helping us out. we wanted to know what the jurisdictional response was from the staff. >> i have full confidence of the staff, hearing what this discussion is going to put forth regulations that are consistent with our discussion. i appreciate that we all want that. the process has been that we recognized as you did that our procedures or not a good fit for sunshine issues and we all recognize that we needed to make changes several years ago. we developed a proposal, you reviewed it and make your changes. what came before is in november is that was meant to help the commissioners. the staff

but also i worry a lot about the health of our force. having said that, i also said earlier that i believe that we have the most resilient force that we could have ever imagined, and 5 years ago if you'd told me that we were going to be at combat for a decade, and be able to keep our soldiers and family members with us, i would not have believed that. but as you look back and see how we have been able to adapt across the military, but specifically in the army and keep our demands and keep our force with us and take care of our troops, i believe that's quite impressive and i'm really concerned about our ability to do that and i remain focused than to for the foreseeable future because as you well know people is what the army is about and our ability to do that and keep faith with our families and soldiers is what i remain key about. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. madam chair. i have a couple of broad questions and then i have, as you probably guess, the air force on my mind, so i'll come to you in a second, so these are first yes or

but also i worry a lot about the health of our force. having said that, i also said earlier that i believe that we have the most resilient force that we could have ever imagined. 15 years ago if you had told me that we were going to be in combat for a decade and be able to keep our soldiers and family members with us, i would not have believed that but as you look back and see how we have been able to adapt across the military that specifically in the army, to meet the demand to keep our force with us and take care of our troops, i think that is quite impressive and i'm really concerned about our ability to continue to do that and i will remain focused on that for the foreseeable future because as you well know, people is what the army is all about and so, our ability to do that and keep pace with our soldiers and families is something i remain concerned about. >> thank you senator ayotte. senator begich. >> thank you very much madam chair. i have a couple of broad questions and general breedlove as you can probably guess -- these are jus

overall, i am pleased to support the strategic forces mark. i would like to comment briefly on the importance of protecting national security in a constrained budget environment. the bipartisan view on the national nuclear security administration programs, particularly in light of the ratification last year of the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty and missile defense. first i'd like to note that this mark contains important provisions that advanced national security while also promoting fiscal responsibility, such as improving satellite operations and supporting the air force's space acquisition strategy by supporting a block by fix price contracting approach. by assuring sufficient production and sustainment schedules for missile defense and for the nuclear enterprise. by conducting oversight of large scale construction programs and building on good progress related to improving efficiencies at our nuclear sites. and implementing the new s.t.a.r.t. nuclear reduction programs. secondly, the subcommittee mark recommends full funding for nnsa atomic energy d

you should see it before the air force presented the budget proposal that substantially cut your force base on the claims that they have and they have not shown you. >> i agree, sir. as we have gone through this process, the thing that i have come to the conclusion is that the analysis that i have been able to see, the answer is sometimes important. the conclusion is important. as important are the initial going in assumptions and the methods methodologies used in te metric of what you're trying to measure. i do not think that is sufficient. you need to go back and look at the process of the methodology and assumptions. that is the thing that concerns me. how we got to some of that. >> i agree with you. i do not think these cuts in the air guard reserves is going to save us money. i think it is going to cost us a lot more. we saw how important they were to was in iraq and afghanistan. that is not a capability you can turn on and off like a switch. that is not even going into the continental u.s. i share the concern of a lot of the governors. they were not listened to. we will talk abou

the air force decided last fall to go ahead and fly the aircraft.me additional safety measures on. also they've given the pilots some more instrumentation in the cockpit. what they need to do now is fly and try to figure it out as they fly the aircraft. >> this aircraft has -- and the air force has always said a tremendous deurnt value because of its unique category and unique capabilities. does this give a black eye to that, does it undermine the f- 22's value? >> no in my opinion. it's a good question about the deteurns value, but the f-22 retains that strong deterrent value. for one thing, we're not on a wartime footing in the pacific theater, for example. believe me, if there were a need to have the f-22 up in combat, they would go right ahead and do it. these restrictions don't in any way destract >> rebecca, thanks very much. >>> coming up j7pi(ñnnext, wh troops crtsÑ-g;%=in afghanistan say about the war and their afghan allies >>> our next guest is one of the çft4vyÑocrack reporters th sister publication marine corps times. dan lamont is ju

realistically, within the current charter constraints, the task force could meet a month earlier. no more. it might be helpful to clarify whether you're talking about a charter amendment. >> what if we said as soon as possible? mr. pilpel? >> rather than say the task force should consider, i think we should say the city should consider a charter

that is why -- my question, why the task force did that. thank you for your response. >> i just want to chime in that i did not know about this. i agree with my colleagues. if the issue with a quorum issue, that we need to talk about the structure of the task force rather than violate the city charter. it is the case that we need to reduce the size of the task force, then we need to figure out a structure within which the ordinands can run. i anders stand that as an all volunteer body, you are not paid to be there. but there needs to be a discussion about how we change the way the task force administers their meetings if quorum is an issue rather than violate the city charter. thank you, supervisor, for bringing that up. i did get an e-mail from suzann stating that she would not be able to be here today. next we have mark, who cannot be here today. then i will call [unintelligible] and then david. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i have my own business. i will be able to attend these long meetings. this should not be an issue. i hope to offer

but does the air force jet have a fatal flaw that killed this young pilot? an exclusive investigation. >>> plus, sweet "revenge." it seemed like a good idea at the time, but tonight, you be the judge. tonight, my acting debut on the hit show "revenge" and what it was like to play me. >> did you murder tyler barrel? >>> this is "nightline," may 2nd, 2012. >>> good evening. i'm cynthia mcfadden. tonight, the glossy world of fashion magazines where young girls can never be too thin or too flawless. what happens when real girls can't measure up to perfection? one expert says it can be more dangerous than drugs. abc's linsey davis brings husband one 14-year-old determined to change things. >> reporter: long legs, perfect skin and glossy hair. just exactly who looks like this? actually, nobody. never before have they been made to look so skinny, so air brushed, so perfect. and it turns out that can be dangerous. that is why 14-year-old julia traveled from maine to new york to lead a protest. a mock photo shoot. >> we wanted to show "seven teen" we love our bodieses