After announcing the creation of the Carbon Emissions Reduction Taskforce (CERT) that would eventually impose a carbon tax, Gov. Inslee assured the public that—in the name of transparency—all task-force meeting would be open to the public.
Well, as is the trend with our green governor, Inslee’s assurances are not all that… assuring.
Washington State’s Office of Financial Management released an amendment to its recent Request for Proposal for “expert consulting assistance to support the Carbon Emissions Reduction Taskforce (CERT) and the Governor’s Office on the design and analysis of a carbon emission reduction market program for Washington State.” The amendment—which seeks to answer questions regarding CERT—is truly an enlightening piece of literature.
Some questions and the alarming answers:
Question 12: Does the state anticipate the need to live stream, broadcast, record, or in any other way create public access or a detailed record (e.g., video, live audio recording, etc.) of the proceedings? If so, is the contractor responsible for arranging and paying for these needs?
Answer: No live broadcast or detailed record will be needed. The Taskforce will allow members to participate by conference phone, if the final room arrangements are suitable, though the co-chair has encouraged members to attend in person or send a staff observer instead.
Question 14: If the meetings are open to the public, who will be responsible for managing the public presence at the meetings and how structured will that process need to be (e.g., sign-in process, etc.)?
Answer: The Taskforce will not be conducting public hearings, and will not be taking public comments during their meetings. OFM and the Governor’s Office will be responsible for separately engaging stakeholders and the public regarding the work of the Taskforce, and any actions taken in response to the Taskforce’s advice to the Governor. The bidder will be responsible for managing any disruptions that might occur during a Taskforce meeting, with assistance from OFM staff and any available facility security, as needed and appropriate.
So much for transparency… and, apparently, the green agenda. Here is an amusing question to wrap-up the rather depressing q&a above:
Question 4: Given that the subject matter is about reducing carbon emissions and email is generally less carbon intensive than hand delivery or mailing of hard copy material, are email submittals possible?