will take about eight, 10 hours. little description as a rough summer rates so that people can follow along. we have the district descriptions, and those are already on the website. i'm not sure if you wanted us to do district descriptions before those are completed. there are more formal. -- they are mor formal. >> when i spoke with john, he indicated before the actual final map, he would have to work with the consultant. since they are waiting for precincts and such, he was indicating a final product would not be available for about a month or more. maybe just the final draft map, where we are doing it now with

descriptions? like, monday? >> i think he might be talking about something different. they're starting to precinct monday, based on our lines, and then they're making allies available five years. they're getting a final map. >> right, he was indicating by the time -- it would take a month, but i could talk to him about that. >> will have a final map for taskforce purposes at the end of this meeting. but elections will not publish its map with the new district until -- >> right, and we will also have it on the web. mr. mcdonnell: sure, thank you. >> clarification of statistics? what will that cover again? mr. pilpel: i think i raised the

question in this meeting. i'm not sure what is possible, but what i was referring to was that the statistics that were shown in the 2000 redrawing, that describes some of it. for each district, the population, the deviation from the mean, expressed in numbers as well as percentage, statistics around out race and ethnicity, voting age population, and the like. those were included in the last redistricting task force report. anything along those lines would be helpful, to the extent possible, to include and summarize the analysis from what we have done. at mr. mcdonnell: okay. any other questions? and that is doable? >> no problem at all. we do have one question.

we will create some maps that show the old and new boundaries, and we're also going to make some and brutalized -- some individualized district maps, and we want to know what you would like to see on those maps. this goes directly to what kinds of data you would like to present or you think is useful. for example, total population deviation, maybe a couple of other things on there. if you like to give feedback on what you like to see in the bos 6xoxes, basically. mr. mcdonnell: when you say this? >> voting age population, race and ethnicity, the other data that we could draw from. we have not done that so far,

so i'm assuming you probably do not want that at this point. it could make it crowd, but we just want to ask. mr. pilpel: if i may? for my purposes, again, just the format that was used in the 2000 report as a baseline would be great. for the maps, it was just the maps themselves for each district, sort of a zoom-in that showed each district, and then the tables with the statistics were separate. if that much could be done, i think that would be sufficient. >> ok, so we did not put the data up on, we just put the district, and the data is in the appendix. >> what about population? district 1, this is the population?

>> i think all of that information would be in the tables. i will share this with you. >> do we want to clarify what should be included in the table? i don't know if anyone wants me to clarify what should be in that table or if i should just leave that? mr. mcdonnell: i would just mirror the 2000 report, and for purposes of the individual districts, continuation have done. -- continue as you have done. >> could you switch to this map mr. mcdonnell: one second? : i'm sang continue what you have done. -- could use which to this map for a second? mr. mcdonnell: i am saying continued as you have done. >> it is a nice way of showing

that. >> we actually did a prototype. if one of you would like to look at that later. >> ok, it looks pretty. >> with the old maps/new map comparisons, with this be included in the appendix? >> and pictures? mr. mcdonnell: yes. our photos should be each of our respective districts, as a pop out. >> perfect. [laughter] we will work on that. mr. mcdonnell: okay, in terms of the final report, we are now entering the information, is there anything else that we need to consider? with respect to the final report?

we're going to insert our final vote, retroactively, obviously. sorry, let me interrupt for just a second. ms. tidwell: mr. mcdonnell: i mcdonnell: no, i know that you are pulling district 7. what else do you need? >> other than the vote, no. mr. mcdonnell: okay, excellent. ms. leigh? is there, for purposes of approving the final report, should we now go back to item 4, approve the map, come back and insert date, then approve the

final report? ms. leigh: that would be my recommendation. mr. mcdonnell: thank you very much. >> the park is reminding you that you should take a final comment before we do this. mr. mcdonnell: yes. >> and i believe before you vote on the final map, you have any proposals that you did? just for meeting purposes -- mr. mcdonnell: we're going to go back in just a moment to item 4. but i want to both have member leigh -- to make sure we have answered everything we need to

come up with regard to the final report. ok, ms. tidwell? ms. tidwell: yes, sir, i need to make one more slight change, but you can proceed. i'm listening. mr. mcdonnell: actually, i'm going to invite you back up here. ms. tidwell: okay, i'm sorry. >> can i ask a question, meantime? since i had to write during the break, what about any changes? it mr. mcdonnell: i'm not sure. what do you propose?

to make non substantive changes in their discretion mr. mcdonnell: okay, any discussion? done. >> thank you. >> were we going to put a logo on it with the names and cover letter. mr. mcdonnell: what do you propose? >> i would propose a short-term letter from the mayor to the board -- from the board to the mayor, either sing this is the report, or have that being the intruder -- not the intro, but something that looks relatively official, we are doing a thing here. mr. mcdonnell: done. ms. tidwell?

ms. tidwell: yeah, and good after i make this one on it. mr. mcdonnell: we will not include this item. all right, for purposes of the agenda, we're going back to item number 4, mapping, for purposes

of a final review and approval of the final map. if we could switched the view to the final map, that would be helpful. ms. tidwell: i think i hit save the can. >> i was going to say, did you hit safe? [laughter] >> that would be horrible. will be here until midnight. mr. mcdonnell: ok, there will be a time of statement. >> chair?

may i point out that the boxes in the districts currently do not reflect the three digits we talked about. we will do that in the pdf. mr. mcdonnell: perfect, thank you. questions. >> there was some question earlier about the island. we need to do anything formally about that? >> the consultant can tell you briefly the non-population changes they made. >> there are two issues. one is we have over laded the district's again. that resulted in a zero population change. but like to tell you what they are. the first is between district 7 and 4, this change was made to align the supervisor reallline,

specifically on the boulevard, we moved the median to 41st avenue from disparate 4 to district 7. the second change was on the border between districts 7 and 11. in this case, we aligned the supervisor district line, moving from the 280 eastern most lane to the 280 western most lane. we move that from district 11 to district 7, and we also included the whole median of the geneva underpass, from d 11 to d 7.

and again, this was a zero population change. we then ran various checks, including a continuity check on the planned area, verified the plans, and we had two results on the continuity check. when we had zero population non contiguous area, and that is the area over here. that is a 0 population, nine contiguous area, because it was initially connected to district 6, and we moved out to district 10, because there is a census block that was otherwise cut off from district 6. that was done. .

the other continuity check, we just wanted to verify that you wanted to parallel the islands in district 4. and that concludes our report. everything else came out beautifully, as designed. mr. mcdonnell: excellent, thank you. mr. pilpel: we did not address this earlier, and i'm not sure it bears much discussion, acceleration and deferral. i would note for record outhat anyone in an even number number district will have the effect of accelerating, so they will have voted in 2010 and again in 2012, where is anybody in an odd number district and now at an even number district will not be deferred.

although a day of vote. last in 2008 and would have voted in 2012, will not vote again for supervisor until 2014. i'm not sure it needs anything other than that, but i thought it was worth noting. thanks. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. any other questions? ok, i entertain a motion to approve ithis final draft of the met. >> so moved. mr. mcdonnell: is there a second? >> sure, i'll second. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. ok, just before requesting vote, i would invite as you vote if there is a statement, a brief statement, the top order of word being brief, as you vote. you are not required to, but you are welcome to do so. ms. tidwell: yeah. mr. schreiber: yeah.

mr. pilpel: i have a brief statement. i will keep it brief. this is a collective exercise. i thought a lot this afternoon as we went through this whether to support it. i am choosing to support it. i would not have made all of these choices, but we worked as a group, and we worked through a lot of disagreements among speech other, respectfully. i would note and want to continue to call attention to the disparity in voter registration that results from under populating 3 and overpopulating 8. it appears to me that there will be roughly 35,000 voters registered in three, compared with eight, so a vote in

district 3 4 supervisor will matter more than an individual vote for supervisor in district 8. i understand that some disparity will exist. i am concerned we have increased the level of disparity from what it was under the prior plan. that concerns me. otherwise, i can live with the differences in the plan, and thus i cast my vote to support. thank you. ms. mondejar: my vote is yes. i just want to say this is a collective process. it was difficult, we had some disagreements. it is not perfect, but i want to thank my colleagues for working together and coming together for the map. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. mr. alonso: i am going to say yes, and real quick, it was a pleasure working with all of you, and hopefully i never have

to work with you in this capacity again. [laughter] mr. alonso: but in the end, we pretty much brought the best out of the city as we could. thank you. >> i vote in support of the map. i also really want to thank everybody for working together on this, and it has been a pleasure to work with everybody. i personally feel like i learned a great deal about the city, which is what i will take the most value from a personal level forever, really. i want to thank, in that regard, the staff, the consultants, the district attorneys that have worked with us. they have been a tremendous resource to us. i also think everybody in the community. i am amazed summon people have spent so much time, whether in our meetings or submitting it public comment or facebook, or

what have you, it has been a very rich and critical source of information for all of us. i admire the dedication of everyone who has committed the time. ms. melara: i also want to thank everyone who supported us in this process, and all disagreements and agreements that we had, it was a lot of fun. the long nights or not a lot of fun, but i want to say yes outo the map. in the interest of collaboration. i want to say again, in district 10, i will come back in 10 years just for that purpose. so hopefully i will be alive when i come back. but other than that, i think we did a great job. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. ms. lam: i am voting in support

of our map, at what to think of the task force and the staff that support this process, and of course the members of the san francisco community for coming out. i think this product is truly an engagement of the public, not just of our own individual contributions to the redistricting process, and i hope that san francisco residents recognize -- my personal goal was this is going to be an inclusive process for all, and thank you. mr. mcdonnell: excellent. thank you very much. i also vote in support of the map. i think it reflects where i began the process. i said yes to participation because of my interest and desire in getting the community engaged. on the one hand, i feel really good that we did a good job in that regard. that said, there are still a number of people in our

community who did not get engaged. as i think about what we might have done better, that is one area that i wish we had more time and resources to focus more time and attention on. that said, still had a great turnout of the committee, which i am proud and pleased about, and i feel like they're for where we have landed with respect to this final map represent that. the last comment i would make, when we began the process, it was clear to me from a number of perspectives there was this expectation that the political views and perspectives of many, including individual task force members, would dominate the process. i am very, very grateful to my colleagues that has not been the case. i think that speaks to the commitment and integrity of task force members that was not the case. it is not that we cannot have political points of view, it is that we allow this to be put on the back burner and allow ourselves to be open to public

comment and land on decisions with respect to the districts that allow us to land on this now final map. so i am happy to say that we now have an approved final map. thank you all very much. [applause] >> could i add one more thing? i want to thank you and vice chair lam for taking on roles that he played. you in particular presiding over i92 of the 100 hours of the meetings we have had, i know it has been a very difficult role, and you have done extremely well, and we all owe you. and everyone involved in this, whether this side or the other, owes a lot to you and to chair lam for stepping up, and you also did a wonderful job. mr. mcdonnell: thank you very much.

all right, thank you all very much. moving back to item number five, we have a draft final report that we will now insert the approval date and folk, and that will allow us to have a final report. before i ask for a vote, at any public comment on the final report ? excellent. ms. leigh, anything else we have to do with the final report before approval? ms. leigh: i believe there was a comment about delegating authority to someone to make final grammatical mr. mcdonnell: edits mcdonnell yes. ms. leigh: other than that, not to my knowledge. are you satisfied it is final? ms. tidwell: yes, with the exception of the vote and final grammatical fixes.

mr. mcdonnell: okay, two pieces? >> combine them. mr. mcdonnell: all right, i entertained a motion to delegate the final edit responsibility to ms. tidwell and approval of the final report. >> so moved. >> second. mr. mcdonnell: alright, is there any objection? >> not objecting, but what we do a roll call on the final report. mr. alonso: yes. ms. melara: yes. ms. lam: yes. ms. mondejar: yes. mr. pilpel: yes. mr. schreiber: yes.

ms. tidwell: yes. mr. mcdonnell: thank you so much. >> i just wanted to thank tidwell, melara, and leigh, and really, thank you for taking the time to pull all lavar reports together -- pull all of our reports together. mr. mcdonnell: thank you very much. it moving again, item number six. a press conference. based on lots of discussion and exploration with the city attorney around options, they are fairly limited in that while

we do want to find a suitable, formal moment of issuing of the report, the problem is if we do it collectively, that it constitutes a meeting. once it constitutes a meeting, we are back where we started again. so our options are, a, we hold a press conference with less than a quorum present, which therefore does not constitute a meeting and we issue it, or to report its issued and a less public, less formal, less visible way and just gets distributed to committee and habitants. discussion? >> i have a suggestion. i suggest we hold a press conference with share mcdonnell

and vice chair lam, and maybe a couple other task force members would be willing to participate in that so we would have at least a public presentation of the final map and the result. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. mr. alonso: or perhaps we could have john did a press conference on his own, provided he has time, since he is not an official member of the task force. mr. mcdonnell: okay, and obviously we would have to explore that with him. we cannot commit him at this moment. atmr. lee: i do think it is important, in whatever way, to get the word out quickly, based on the same issues that member pilpel reyes, there are a number of implications that will move quis in our interest and the city's interest for people to know what they're voting, when they did not expect to b