Now I'm rattled. I don't know what to do.
Welcome, Mr. Ferguson and Mr. Mogan. It's good to see you again.
As just a general thing, because the committee wants to look at the charter itself and do a review, one of the things I've learned in this short year of being associated with the department is that there's an incredible amount of activity that goes on, and often the overlaps take place. You can tell from the questions, which sometimes go into an area that's totally separate, and so on.
One of the things I want to focus on for a moment and get some comments on from you as we try to move forward is that there's an evaluation process under way, and I think it's important that we're made very clear what that is so that we're not duplicating effort. But the committee does want to take a look at the review, and certainly when I started off, in my briefing last November, one of the first things we ran into was the discussions with the legion about this living document. It still sticks in my mind that there were many players who participated very actively in the creation of the original document, and I think the committee would probably like to hear from the appropriate groups that were early participants. So it would be helpful to know what the list looks like, so we can make sure that we at least include those who should be here.
The other thing, though—and perhaps you can help us out a bit here—is whether there are some things where we'd add to a problem, as opposed to a solution, if we delve in them too deeply right now. In other words, is there a point to waiting until the evaluation process is complete before we get into that?
I'm not looking for us to avoid it. I just don't want us to get involved in duplicating effort if in fact we're going to get a report in a few months that's going to clarify something.
Can you comment on that? As we move forward looking at this, I'm sure every member here wants to be helpful. We all have our individual frustrations, including, I know, professionals in the department, but I think we have something good going here as a basic premise. The process is a good one. The charter has some excellent opportunity to even improve on what it's doing right now, but we want to make sure that we're being helpful, as opposed to simply adding a parallel track going down the road.
Do you have some general comment as we move forward as to things that we perhaps should be considering ourselves as a committee?