e commsi should be auoriz toire ditialior al siti stto commentass owe neveeceived a rese froheor's office abecmeation five dtwo, the currentpositi e civiseice etne staff, oneaid for uc d e pa fory e measinceheirpor's terise neher's noreas he aiorcnot fi this ne siti at is ror ifyeauestioi wille ytower em supeormpkyo veucfoe report ere y beecific questio t int toget a clarificatiorom e ci attornetesof the procs. erstdi it wi respect to thireport, civil grd he board oferviso to re toecmeatio5tofi er recmeation 5, d at the we les oat wcoittee we to reo ecific items k g cllanyqutionfo e cil jury? 's doit this way,iere's somee fr thear would like tresenthe dertment's pepecte, e we followuwi tion >> tt woulee, t you. peisorcpos: veuc ood mog,pervisors. i am from the mayor's office. i wanted to actually correct one thing that the grand jury mentioned. we actually did respond to recommendation 5. unfortunately, it was mislabeled in our response. so if you do look at the mayor's response, we did address that particular recommendation. supervisor campos: supervisor farrell. supervisor farrell: committee may be read into the record so people are aware? -- can you may be read into the records of