bring it up to 6 million in any one year, because it is making the market to crazy. we passed that limit, by the voters. and guess what -- when the market tanked in the late 1980's and 1990's on the office market and boston, a vancouver, new york, houston had massive economic weapons san francisco had gone ahead of the curve and hit dead son think reasonable. if you go back and read the print -- and had done something reasonable. if you go back and read the print from the time, it said it saved our cookies, financially, the city. if you are perfectly happy with allowing the board to have no power to put something on it to the voters that the voters agree with but you might not have eight votes, you're cutting off your own power, and you're cutting off the people's power. if you want to solve the problem of initiatives going on to the

ballot without a lot of thought, require a hearing on the them. that is a simple solution. require a hearing before it gets put on the ballot. i would support that. but do not do something that you have not thought through. i know prop k and prop m would have been dead. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. is there any other public comment on this item? supervisor elsbernd. >> just a response, you know, there are a number of ballot measures that are not introduced legislatively and subject to a mayoral veto. the mayor can put measures on. it does not even have to go to the legislative process. there is a much bigger problem here, and i appreciate that we can point to a ballot measure that was approved 25 years ago, but i think i can point to three ballot measures that were introduced 48 hours ago that necessitate the need for this charter amendment. i appreciate that there can be a

couple kernels in the history of ballot measures over the last many decades, but i think if we look collectively at all the ballot measures that have been introduced by four supervisors or a mayor in the last 25 years, a vast majority have been those that have been written without a lot of input and i could absolutely benefit. let me throw out some that perhaps some votes in the progress of world would agree to. i think there would be a lot of members of the board of supervisors to like the opportunity to address some of the mistakes in this particular ordinance that as a talking about. this cuts both ways. there's a lot of good government in this charter amendment, and it should absolutely go forward. supervisor kim: thank you. any other comments? i just wanted to say that i really appreciate supervisor wiener coming back to the rules committee several times on this item and also listening to members of the public and his colleagues on some potential ways to make this charter amendment more palatable as we

move forward. i do think that as a charter amendment that is perspective, not impacting any past initiatives that voters had an impression when they were voting on would be permanent, unless overturned by going back to the ballot, but i think that makes this initiative stronger. i would have preferred if we had more conversations on ways that we can perform the system overall, so whether we talk about requiring additional signatures or requiring a hearing prior to going onto the ballot or requiring the mayor to have supervised signatures -- all of that discussion, it would have been nice to have more extended time. however, i do not see a reason to not put this forward to voters. i would support moving this out with no recommendation to the full board. i did want to and knowledge that there probably members of the public that expected this to come later on the agenda. so, madam clerk, is there a way

to keep public comment open on this item? >> yes, i do not see any action. >> ok, i just do not want folks to feel that they did not have an opportunity to speak on this item. but we will call you when we open up if there are folks who want to speak about it. supervisor wiener: that is fine. i will be in the budget committee. just let me know and i can walk over. supervisor kim: thank you. any other comment? ok, we will continue this item for public comment. madam clerk, can you please call item number 3? >> item number 3, hearing to consider appointing three members, terms to be determined, to the redistricting task force. their three seats and 23 applicants. supervisor kim: i believe most of the 23 applicants are here today. i mentioned earlier that because we have 23 candidates, that we will be asking everyone to limit their presentation to 3 minutes

or less. and we may be following up with questions from my colleagues here on the committee. i will be calling your name in the order that you are listed on the agenda. if for any reason there is something pressing about your time, please let our clerk know. i do know that anna yee was not able to make it here today. we did receive an e-mail from her, explaining she has a prior conduct of the first person to date is brigette leblanc. after brigette leblanc, this is carolyn squeri. >> good morning, supervisor kim and supervisor elsbernd and to the listening audience. my name is brigette leblanc and i am in native of san francisco and a resident of district 10, and also a product of public

schools. as a graduate of lowell high school leadership san francisco and also a small business community owner, a member of the city college of san francisco community, democratic and committed the clubs, i think that with my different involvement in a lot of different communities, that i actually bring in a lot to the redistricting task force. mainly as an educator, it has been a goal of my to inform the communities and encourage them to get engaged in any process that concerns them and to remain active. for years i have been involved in community meetings and forums, and through that process, i am strong enough to push back and temper what is anticipated to be more political objectives. i am knowledgeable of a broad swath of neighborhoods and communities. as you know, it is important that the appointments at the same profiles, but as a whole, they embody the diversity and

the spirit that reflects the city and county of san francisco. for these reasons, i feel that i am is strong enough to push back when necessary, and it is important to involve all of our communities in this process. i hope that you consider my recommendation from the letters of support i have received from all of the different committees in sentences go to be appointed to the redistricting task force. thank you. supervisor kim: are there any questions for the applicant? thank you so much. >> thank you. supervisor kim: next, we have carolyn squeri. are you here today? ok. then i am going to call up christopher elmendorf. after him, we have eric mcdonnell. >> thank you for hearing for me today. my name is christopher elmendorf. as a a professor of law at uc

davis school of law where i teach election law, and i am resident of san francisco, where i have lived in the mission district since 2005. i wanted to say a few words this morning about why i want to serve on this task force and the values i would bring to the task of the task force. i see this as a public service opportunity, no more and no yes. i am is a tenured professor. i teach and have relevant knowledge in this area that i think i could bring to the project. but i owe no debt to any candidate, to any interest group, and i have no interest in being into debt or having indebted to me any candidate or interest group that has a stake in this process. the u.s. stands alone among all industrialized democracies the use single member district elections in that we have a largely political process for redrawing legislative districts. virtually all of the country's the use single member district electrics -- elections have

some non-partisan democratic process. it is that non-partisan perspective that i would bring to this task. that said, i want to put all my cards on the table and tell you a little bit about the values that i would bring to the process. first of all, at the most important thing is the task force complies with state and federal law, which require population equality roughly a month legislative districts and also to the california voting rights act and the federal voting rights act disallowed the dilution of minority voting strength. second, of equal importance, giving effect to the values that are stated, the objectives stated in the san francisco charter. in some respects, it restate -- restates values already in state and federal law, but it adds to that. it adds specifically the protection of communities of interest in the respect for existing neighborhood boundaries. now, insofar as there is

remaining discretion in the task force, if the application of these legal criteria do not lead to a determinant result, what value should be considered? i would list 3. one, opportunities for historically disadvantaged in politically and incorporated communities. second, respect for what i would call informational committees, that is drawing district boundaries in such a way that they correspond to local media markets so that people have good information about what their representatives are up to. third, fairness and responsiveness, vis-a-vis the principal political coalition or cleavage giant san francisco that is a division between the progressives and moderates. fairness, meaning the plant cannot be biased in one direction or the other. responsiveness, meaning there should be a critical mass of the swing districts since the public opinion is reflected in representation. thank you very much. supervisor kim: thank you. >> i have a question to you have

a pretty serious election law resume. did you apply to the california redistricting commission? >> i did not. >> any reason why not? >> no. that is a good question. partly, the sense that that project might be unmanageable in its scope and level of commitment. i am a resident of san francisco and have two small children. to me, this felt like a more manageable project, and i feel like i know more. i have a better feel for san francisco policies than california's statewide policies. >> just to get a sense of your analysis, have you a good draft one of the state maps? any thoughts on how they have achieved communities of interest, legal standards? >> general observation about the process -- >> maybe that. instead of looking at the results, what do you think of their process so far? >> i think it has been

reasonable. they have tried to follow the guidelines that have been established for them. i think the way the process is set up, which was to denied any access to political information and to relegate to happenstance, you might say, the objectives of partisan fairness and competitiveness. that is not how i would have designed the process, but that is the process that they were given. and i think they have tried to follow the criteria set out for the. from what i can see, they have done a serviceable job of that. there are some questions, i think, about the division of latino communities. there are also some things to try to do to create new opportunities for asian americans that have sport -- that historically have been relatively and incorporated in the california political process. i respect the work that they have done. supervisor kim: any other questions? just a quick question. how long have you lived in san

francisco? >> since 2005. supervisor kim: since 2005. ok. no other questions. >> thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. next, we have eroc/after eric, we have gia daniller-katz. >> i am eric mcdonnell, native from san francisco, born and raised in the western addition. i spent some citi lakeside and ingleside. i spent my entire professional life working in community, working on behalf of low-income families, working on behalf of those marginalized and often those outside our legislative and political process. my interest in bridge is a fitting in this process is two- fold. one, it is a critical process that will determine how folks have a voice and will determine how folks can experience the

distribution allocation of resources, and it is critical to communities across our city. what is important to me is that this process resulted in a fair and equitable and transparent process where, again, everyone has a voice, and then there is opportunity for the distribution of resources. the opportunity, i believe, is to continue to address what continues to be challenges in our city with regard to access to resources. when i grew up in the western addition, i experienced firsthand the challenges of limited resources, limited access to resources, and so then experiencing the what in not understanding the why, an ally of the understand the why. i respectfully ask for your support. supervisor kim: thank you. any questions? supervisor elsbernd. supervisor elsbernd: i notice you're on the board of leadership san francisco. what brought you to that? what was your interest? >> sure, so i was -- i guess i

had been at united way -- i currently served as chief operating officer at united way and the bay area. we engage in the communities across seven counties. diane easton approached me to be a part of their class in 2002. following that class, she asked if i would join the board. my interest was two-fold. one, my commitment to san francisco and the committee. two, the opportunity that has afforded folks to go through lsf, which is about leadership development and growing committee trusties, folks who not only live and work in this city but also take ownership and pride and ensuring that we have a great place to live, work, and drive. i have been on the board since 2003. supervisor kim: supervisor farrell capito supervisor farrell: -- supervisor farrell. supervisor farrell: have to apply for any of the commission's report? >> i have not.

supervisor farrell: any particular reason in this besides interest in san francisco? >> that is correct. 10 years ago, it was not a big deal to me at the time. supervisor elsbernd: one question -- sorry, you get to be the first person to be asked this. some others may be asked this. you have but a very good resume. it sells well in the public would like it. are you going to run for office in the next 10 years? [laughter] and the me be very blunt, i do not want to see people on this committee who are going to draw lines for their own benefit. >> that is a very fair and appropriate question. i have not and do not have any political aspirations, no. that is not my intent at all, certainly not why i would want to get into this kind of process. supervisor kim: thank you. you do have a very impressive resume. as my colleague pointed out. i just want to see about your

ability to commit to the task force. as you know, it will be an incredible amount of time. do you believe you'll be able to balance this with the work you're doing? >> sure. one of the other reasons this is an important process to me both personally and professionally, in my role at united way, part of my role is to represent us in the committee in ensuring that we're speaking to the needs that we know are important across the community. i am here today trying to represent our organization in this process. i have colleagues that are doing likewise in other communities. this is poor to our work. so, yes, i will have time, because frankly, it is part of our role. >supervisor kim: thank you. you also talked about making sure this task force is transparent. what would you do to ensure that the public is engaged with the task force and had to ensure that the process continues to be transparent? >> no specific idea other than

ensuring that i come individually, and as a member of the task force, if that should take place, that we would ensure that there is a process that will regularly pushing out update on where we are with regard to process and deliberations and key questions. and then in fighting an encouraging committee participation on how we should be responding to these kinds of challenges. i do not think it should be just a task force that should inform. it should be the community's thoughts that should inform the altar and results of the task force. supervisor kim: thank you. seeing no other questions, i am willing to call our next applicant. >> i asked him a question that i did not ask brigette leblanc. supervisor kim: both brigette leblanc and christopher elmendorf -- >> no, no. it is not a question for chris. i want you to share with me your thoughts on what attracted you to leadership san francisco, why

did you participate? >> first and foremost, because i am a resident of san francisco, and i feel that i am is the color in the city that i was born and raised in. i was recommended to apply for leadership san francisco. i did my homework, and i thought that it was a great opportunity to really understand how the city works. and it was a great opportunity to me. we had like 70 people in our class from all different walks of life, and it was just a wonderful experience. i actually became more engaged in my community, and i really knew who to call and how to get help in different areas that we actually covered. that is it. supervisor kim: thank you. gia daniller-katz. next, we have james tracy. after james, we have jason porth.

>> good morning, supervisors. my name is james tracy. usually when we come in front of each other like this, it is usually run partisan politics, different issues that we're debating of the day. i believe that the number one thing that any commissioner can do is to put aside these things and just basically obey the law. there is the city charter. federal civil rights law. there is a host of other laws that we have to obey. and we have to balance the needs of a very changing the city that is very, very complex geographically. we do not have as many ethnic enclaves that are unbroken as we did even 10 years ago and 10 years before that. so there will be a lot of challenges before us, basically, you have to be able to put aside

your own ideological beliefs and find out exactly what will be the conditions that can give every single san franciscan, no matter where they live, an equal chance at voicing their will. i participated heavily in the census effort of getting out the word. we assembled a team of people that came from the most conservative -- evangelical churches in the tenderloin and down into former sex workers. that is what i would like to represent here. it is fitting that the current system has produced supervisor campos and supervisor elsbernd, people in very different out what's that are good representatives of their districts, and that is something that i wanted to say. i will answer any questions. supervisor kim: thank you. supervisor elsbernd: i have observed you, watched you, listened to you for many years,

and you are very passionate on a number of issues. and very well-informed on those issues. that said, a lot of those issues, at least in my memory, are largely kind of central city issues. district 6, district 8, district 9. tell me about your knowledge of the west side of the city? if you are on this committee, you'll have to talk about not just legal requirements but communities of interest in neighborhoods on the west side. >> one thing that the west side shares in common with the east side that many people do not understand fully is the fact that they have large immigrant populations. irish, russian, and obviously a growing asian population. so i believe that is a good deal of commonality between the west side and the east side, more so than we read in the chronicle or the bay guardian. it is also the home of old school san francisco. right? the families and communities that have held on despite these

changes and not moved out of san francisco, even when some of the economic conditions and other opportunities that they had had them exit to someplace like hayward. i think it is a crucial area. supervisor kim: could you tell us also where you have lived in san francisco and how long you have been a resident here. >> i have officially been a resident of san francisco since 1992, from the time of about late 1988 to 1992, i went back and forth between oakland, where i was born, and san francisco, or i was the caretaker for my uncle who was living in a senior building and living part-time with my aunt. but i official amid this my home in august of 1992. i have lived in the mission district and the marina and south of market very briefly.

>supervisor kim: ok, to what you talked about how it is important to set aside your politics and ensure conditions to give everyone an equitable voice, whether you live on the west side the east side. can you talk a little bit about how you would kind of take this values on in the process of redistricting? >> i am certain that through this process, anybody is going to see an opportunity basically to at the precinct or subtract the precinct. it would at favorable outcomes for the campaigns that they are working on -- i think that is wrong. it is basically, you have to look at the law. you have to balance and there will be compromises that have to be made. there will be adjustments that have to be made. and you have to balance that out to make sure that if, say, the mission is taking a few precincts, the district 8 is

also getting consideration in that way. supervisor kim: ok, thank you so much. supervisor farrell: i have a question for you. you're in 94123 and district two. abby ever applied to many other boards or commissions -- have you ever apply to any other boards or commissions in city hall? if not, why are you here? >> about six years ago, seven years ago, i served on the committee land trust task force with supervisor gonzales. i do not believe i have ever apply for anything else. so this was just -- i saw this as a real opportunity to make sure that there is the type of fairness and civic engagement, debate, and a healthier san francisco for the next 10 years. and, no, i am not running for anything, even dogcatcher for

the next 10 years and probably beyond. i will leave that to you guys. supervisor kim: thank you. supervisor elsbernd: i know you're not running. are you volunteering are working on any mayoral campaigns? >> he is coming also working on it john avalos' campaign, completely unpaid. supervisor kim: thank you. i already called up jason porth, but it is my understanding that gia daniller-katz is also year. i will call you up after jason porth. good morning. >> good morning. jerrick, supervisors, my name is jason porth, and thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. i worked as seven years as a civil rights attorney and provided counsel in eviction meetings for the homeless advocacy project. a significant part of my legal training was as an advocate for domestic violence survivors and on cases dealing with civil liberties, death penalty, and civil rights in education.

i now resentence is this the university. for serving as the university's community relations officer and currently is due to the chief of staff to the president. for three years, i served as president of the jewish democratic club, is city-wide club with members in each and every supervisor districts. like two of my co-applicants, i am an alumnus of leadership san francisco. in all these roles, i have served as a negotiator untypically as consistent -- consensus-builder, working to find agreement among groups with divergent and passion that prospective screen no -- perspectives. i have translated the plans for change to neighborhood constituencies. i know the value of and firmly believe in a cohesive neighborhoods, represented by an elected leader of the board of supervisors. the task force must proceed with great care and a thorough understanding of the impact of drawing lines. the last redistricting task

force united japan town into one district of this task force bears a responsibility to fulfil similar objectives and enter the city's residents will be represented by an individual aware of their concerns and committed. the task force will balance many factors. police of neighborhoods and districts, geography of our city, numerous communities of interest, and the legal protections to ensure that equal power of each vote is cast. it is a reasonable, fair-minded, and skill listener. i seek to help plan and include a process that will gather many perspectives through public input and analyze the information provided by the census. thank you for considering me. supervisor kim: thank you. kathleen coll let -- supervisor elsbernd: let me start with a few questions. my knowledge of your work is san francisco state, and you're also an advocate before the university playground, the neighborhood out there.

west side issues, you know those well. what is your knowledge of the east side? >> southwest state is relieve the city's university. we have run 23 headstart programs around the city and -- in every single supervisor real district. we're educating the city's work force and making sure that the university is in the position to provide people to fill the jobs that the city needs to move forward. my knowledge of the city has grown far beyond just district 7. as president of a club interested in issues across district lines, i have come to know the city quite well as well. supervisor elsbernd: as i said, i know your work through san francisco state and throughout wallenberg. it was an education looking at your resume and learning your work as a civil rights attorney. that is new to me. >> afre