chairman mcdonnell: mr. schreiber? >> my answer is still no, but if other task force members present compelling ropes, my vote is no right now. chairman mcdonnell: thank you so much. i am going to marry you off to someone before these are over. ms. mondejar. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: no, never? >> no to this proposal. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. ms. lam, for clarification, the stoney ford for stony brook move for the 9-11 border would go into --

>> from nine -- >> from 11 to nine. >> right. >> and then bringing the tingley out of eight into 11. we need to see the population variance for those two moves. i am not interested in the st. luke's move. i don't know if that would get us close enough. >> what he identified in the rotation were three, relatively-speaking approximately 800 populations. that is the puzzle move. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mrs. mondejar. -- m's melara. i am not interested in changing our decision we made last time, primarily we made it very deliberately. when the community comes tonight and says you took away this piece, they were not taking into consideration what it would cost elsewhere in their district. we moved something in their

district, and next week the people will come back saying you shouldn't have done that. so let's leave it where it is. so no, no, no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. that's clear. mr. leigh? >> can i ask a question? does the second move require moving st. luke's? chairman mcdonnell: no. the intent is to keep st. luke's in district nine. it has no -- nothing to do with st. luke's present site at all, period. >> i would actually be open to looking at it. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mr. alonso? >> i second that thought, yes. chairman mcdonnell: ok. that's it. for both the reasons that mrs. melara indicated, which is we

made decisions with forethought in mind and with all considerations and the unfortunate reality as we have discussed throughout almost every one of our meetings is that no matter what decision we make, someone will disagree, and they will present a compelling case for changing it. unless we want to meet past april 14, i would suggest that unless there is a compelling case, a new compelling case with new information, then i would not be in favor of making these changes, to shift decisions we just made. it would be different if we hadn't just made these decisions with full task force deliberation. on 6-3, we will not do that. ms. tidwell, let's go to the st. luke. >> i need an upgrade.

chairman mcdonnell: by that clock, we will take a break for ms. tidwell, and we will res chairman mcdonnell: we will resume now our mapping discussion. ms. tidwell, are you prepared to make a proposal relative to st. luke area? >> yes, if we could look at that area on the map. it is currently in district nine.

if you could help me remember -- the one block? >> not the one block. i did not have a recollection as to having st. luke's in nine . i am not interested in it always having been in nine. i am interested in the public testimony and the reason for it being in nine. >> it is part of the community of interest. it is what was in the boundaries of the recognized neighborhood of the mission district. >> chairman mcdonnell: there wasn't a lot of compelling reasons for or against it.

it is one of those institutions that has always been there, and so there wasn't ever a question of moving it. therefore, not a pot of public comment one way or the other -- a lot of public comment one way or the other about moving it or not. >> and if we could also overlay the liberty hill district of the public testimony that has been given. that is further down. >> ok. then i would just look at the lines between 26th and 27th and

chavez on guerrero. you had highlighted the bottom left quadrant. oh, he stepped away. i apologize, but the top quadrant. my understanding that is not a part of st. luke's. does anyone have a different understanding? chairman mcdonnell: it is part of it. >> so then i would just look at the bottom corner of population and deviation. >> as he is looking for that, say again what you are solving for? >> just the public comment around. if we are going to take the position that st. luke should remain in nine, i think that is fine. but if there is additional population that does not really

relate to st. luke's but is there for strain line drawing, put it in eight. >> this block has a population of 101 people. it would bring the differentiation for district eight to 3.85%, and the deviation for district four to 4.84%. >> can i ask related to this, the block southeast of that that is south of guerrero and west of tiffany, does that have any population -- no, not that. south of there. >> that is already in eight. >> right. i understand. chairman mcdonnell: let's hear her proposal first, and then we will come back. >> that answers it. forget it. chairman mcdonnell: can you go back, please?

challenge you. ms. tidwell? >> so i would propose moving that from nine to eight. chairman mcdonnell: mr. schreiber? >> can you refresh my recollection as to the public testimony in support of this? >> it was just this evening, that their community is in district eight, and it looks like they are on the back of the hospital. >> all right, yes. >> chairman mcdonnell:, ms. tidwell. >> i think i am interested in that block as a trade. although i am opening to making this change, i didn't want to add further population to eight. i am willing to do a trade there. could i hear about that? chairman mcdonnell: not at this moment. >> then i am a no at this point, but i am willing to reconsider if it is a relatively fair trade. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mrs. mondejar? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: ms. lam? >> the borders for the highlighted proposal.

>> 27th street, duncan, guerrero and san jose. >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: thanks,. ms. melara? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: and mr. alonso? >> no. >> please make the change. chairman district eight at 3.98 and district nine 4.94. >> can i ask about that other block as anoff set. chairman mcdonnell: no, not at this time. why are you trying tooff set? >> i didn't want to add more population to eight. chairman mcdonnell: is there a sentiment around trying tooff set this. >> i was not interested in offer setting. currently before this move, district nine was at 4.98.

he would certainly pelfrey to stay away from 5% to the extent we can. >> and i am actually good with going to 5% in nine. chairman mcdonnell: thank you, but we are not going to do that at this time. we can add it to the bottom of our list of propose always. i didn't hear a proposal, so i am going to presume for purposes of moving forward that there is not a proposal with respect to the tingley-kayuga? >> i think we voted against it. chairman mcdonnell: no, what we voted against was the rotation. ok. so let's go then to to the sunny side and the conservatory . >> i just had a one-block

proposal here. south of monterrey and east of baden -- no. east of there. >> east of -- >> i would de-select that block and now select the block east of that block. >> moving it into seven? >> yes, that is correct. >> yes? >> yes. >> that is a population of 88 people. it would bring the deviation for district seven to negative .71%. >> hold on for one second. one more time. this is a population of 88 people. it would bring the deviation for district seven to negative

.71%, and the deviation for district eight to 3.46%. >> say the population again for me, please? >> 88. chairman mcdonnell: and so d 7, negative .71%? >> yes. chairman and you are calling for what here? >> the population. eight lovely people, but i am trying to decrease it. it was the only thing that made sense to me. i thought monterrey boulevard was a per line than hurst. it is not the end of the world either way. chairman mcdonnell: mr. lops? -- mr. alonso? >> yes.

chairman mcdonnell: ms. tidwell? >> i think i am going to say no. i don't see any public testimony around that being in sunny side. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mr. schreiber? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mrs. melara? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: ms. lam. >> i used to live at monterrey and juice, and i have for -- for several years, and i think i did have a closer -- the bordering neighborhood, but i am in in support of moving that border to monterrey. chairman mcdonnell: that was a yes? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: and mrs. mondejar? >> no, wipet support this. chairman mcdonnell: all right. so we would not make that change.

>> did we look at russian hill? can we get the count there? the 2-3 border and see. chairman mcdonnell: let's go for a moment -- i am going to come back to this area in a moment. let's go to another area. >> i am not sure how the legal description works here to go from mansell to bayshore because they don't connect. there is a freeway in between. my intent was to go m mansell, up san brunoo and east on paul. it end up selecting one block

with some population, probably a couple of zdeno people and some freeway parcel. i also was interested in going to -- you wanted to do zero population stuff after. so i will hold the other part until later. if we could select the area east of san bruneo and paul in the southeast corner there. chairman mcdonnell: what are you solving for? >> it seemed it was an easier line to describe, san bruno, paul, bayshore. otherwise i think the description gets weird. mansell to a point, across the freeway and up. i am wondering what the population is here? >> that is a population of 84.

it would bring the deviation for district 10 to negative .8%, and the deviation for district nine to 4.72%. >> all right. i would so propose. in general i think using streets where there are streets is better than not, and this uses streets better. that's all. not trying to pull some massive part out. >> what are we trying to do? chairman mcdonnell: if i may try to represent it, this being consistent with regard to a couple of things.

one, straighter lines. in that vein, in this case a border that is more easily described. is that accurate? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: one more time, population and deviations? >> population of this highlighted area is 84 people. the deviation for district 10 would be negative .8%. the deviation for district nine would be 4.72%. >> thank you. chairman mcdonnell: mr. schreiber? >> i would question proposal, while is straightens line, it takes a part of portella out. >> if i may, it takes that corner, and i don't think it is significant one way or the

other. i guess it is relative. >> that "silver and black"s my question. my vote would be no. chairman mcdonnell: mrs. mondejar? >> 84 people live there. they are significant. i would say no. chairman mcdonnell: mrs. lam? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mrs. melara? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: and mr. alonso? no. chairman mcdonnell: ms. tidwell? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. let's go then back up to doctor sorry, give me one moment, please. let's go back up to north panhandle. mr. alonso? >> yes, let's get the population for the portion that is currently in 2:00-1, south

of fulton and east of stan on-- -- stanion. >> that is a population of 2,855 people, to bring the deviation for district five for 3.89% and the deviation for district one to negative 8.01%. >> d-5 one more time? >> 2:00 p 5, 3.8%. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. >> and i would like to see the population of ansa -- vista.

>> would you like me to put the neighborhood layer up and just select those census blocks, or would you like the whole chunk here? >> we will start with the neighborhood layer. >> ok. >> i think it is not the northerly blocks. chairman mcdonnell: he is trying to suggest to you what to consider. finish what you are thinking, and then we will give him a chance to offer a counter thought. >> this population is 1,051

people. it would bring the deviation for district one to negative 2.68%, and for district two, to negative 5.63%. >> let's go ahead and add the remainder blocks up to geary. >> that is a total population of 1,460 people. it would bring the deviation for district one to negative 2.12% and deviation for district two to negative 6.18%. >> ok. i still need to find population. i would propose this swap and search for population, the remainder of the population through isolated chunks of russian hill.

chairman mcdonnell: and solving for? >> basically uniting the north panhandle, keeping this area whole and in one district, and because let's face it, d-5 is pretty much off the table in regards to going to d-1, and we are already limited by what portions of d-2 to take from. any population we take from d-2 we would have to garner likely from russian hill. chairman mcdonnell: and the vista move and the panhandle move are moves we just made? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: for what purple? >> for the panhandle remaining whole. it would be whole, just in a different district. then we could add the population perhaps a block here

and block there in russian hill. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. just to summarize, the initial change was 1,460, ansa vista. deviation would be a -- >> negative 2.12%. chairman mcdonnell: and district two a negative 6.18%. mr. leigh? >> can i ask some clarifying questions? chairman mcdonnell: you may. >> i know we had talked about the u.s.f. campus in those three blocks. can we have the population of those? for me personally i would want to see more on sort of -- i think the implication is the russian hill area. so i would like to see more there. sorry, in stanion going over -- yes, the three blocks called

out on the bottom. >> 142. >> it is 142 people? ok. on the russian hill side, can i also see having the entire line ? chairman mcdonnell: not yet. let's stay here just for a moment. >> so for me personally, i wouldn't want to know what those populations are. chairman mcdonnell: well, that is one proposedoff set. not the only one. i would rather stay here and so we are relative to this with the understands that we have to find off set, one possibility being russian hill. >> so i would be interested in seeing this, understanding that

i am not quite clear of how we would do the off set, but i would be interested in evaluating it. chairman mcdonnell: how do you -- >> yes, for purposes of moving forward, i would say yes, i am up for the switch. living over in that area, to me that is more consistent with the communities. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mr. schreiber? >> so this is both elements that we are talking about right now? chairman mcdonnell: we are taking them one at a time, but yes, the step will be panhandle. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mr. pill -- bell? to a certain extent i am supportive, but i am not sure i want to do this until i know

where we land on russian hill. for me, russian hill determines what is his west and in the one, two and five zones as opposed to two and three. chairman mcdonnell: have we conclude thad russian hill is the only off set? >> no, but i think that is where i am. >> i believe there is a second possible chance. i am willing to with draw my amendment. we take a look at russian hill and the second possibility. chairman mcdonnell: ok, let's go to russian hill. if my math is correct. we need somewhere around 1,300 to off set this. if we could look at the remainder of three blocks of jones street >> that is a population of 593

people for district people. that would bring the deviation to 3.38% and the deviation for district three to 4.01%. >> and then the second idea, move over to cathedral hill. and bring back -- i believe we have it at sutter, and bring it back down to geary. >> correct. it's at sutter right now. population? >> that is a population of 756 people. it would bring the deviation for district 2 to a negative 3.16% and the deviation for district 5 to negative 1.40%. >> and that is about 1,49 people if we make those two

moves, the one in russian hill and the one in cathedral hill. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mr. leigh? >> could i just ask a clarifying question? could we see the overlay of the current district boundaries? yeah. just to get the information, could we see the population of those two additional blocks if we included those? >> do you want the total population for the entire area? >> yes. >> the total population of the selected area is 1,033 people. it would bring the deviation for district to to negative 2.78% and for district five to a negative 1.42%. >> all right. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> sorry. am i supposed to vote on something now? [laughter]