it had the map laid out for the site, and david baker was there. we saw an excellent presentation. we are very interested here and we have known about this for years. this got held up, not only by the evolution of the eastern neighborhoods, but the last business cycle. this is a terrific opportunity, and we look forward to following this. this will be significant because this has been recognized as the poster child of land dedication, with a fabulous opportunity for subsidized and affordable housing on this, carving off a large chunk of the site, with the mayor's office and housing. we would love to see the density blown out and we would love to have a lot of housing in this location. there was a lot of enthusiasm and we want to follow this.

>> and is there additional public comment? public comment is closed. >> we have written comments, but as something brief right now, i was shown, and very early, drawings of a project on the site, by bill and mary murphy. this could have been 10 years ago. this has of all to ever since then, to the eastern neighborhoods projects and the process and through the economy. as well as what else has been happening in the immediate neighborhood, including one of david baker's projects. that is through the area, actually. the public has known about this

for a very long time. the neighborhood association has known about this for a very long time. i actually look forward to seeing the more current iterations and details as they come forward. >> commissioner? >> this is much like a project we had earlier, and this was probably 2003 or 2004, and these held up during the eastern neighborhood situation. and so, this is a pleasant surprise that we finally see them coming forward, and i see some of the rendering sirrah, and from what i see these look very good. this is not what we're here for. we will have comments on the

environmental draft and the impact report, and will be able to send in the comments, and we will take responses and see the project after this is completed. commissioner moore: i look at this as a program e.i.r. with the particular time that this stance, and the architects with the original sketches are not even in business anymore. be that as it may, i would very much like to see this with some of the ideas that came in with the eastern neighborhood. this is tempered by the strong issues that underlie building in this neighborhood.

quite a few things have changed. this falls within the policy decisions that we have made an i am concerned, relative to the deal, that this raises my concerns because we have a number of powerful systems, in this area. these need to be challenged, and they work with this commission very well, anyway. i would like to see the quality of the aspects to be more in line of what can be done, because there is as intense to create projects that challenge

what they ask for us to do. >> i think we do have to pay careful attention to the final eastern neighborhoods decisions, because there were details, and may involve this and the allowances as part of the eastern neighborhood. this is not an exception. this is in line, even when the supervisors were there. >> this is part of the dialogue, -- >> that is what they had in the square. commissioner sugaya: as we are looking into the parking, there is the environmental impact. we will have to take this up at the time it comes through with the project. >> and is there any sign of an

extension for the comments? >> my understanding is that this was posted. excuse me. my understanding is that this was posted and some of the signs were removed at some time in the process. sequa allows the choice of three different kinds of posting. this was legally posted and notified, based on everything that we know, -- >> this is correct. the requirement is actually one of the falling, with publications of an ad in the newspaper, on and around the site, with the occupants and the continuous properties. my understanding is that these

were posted, but posting at the acquisition hall was removed, and when we were made aware of this i spoke to sean murphy. this was remedied within three or four days. i have also discussed this with the city attorney. we have complied. i guess that would extend this to the 15th. >> commissioner moore: if this is what they are describing, i would not see any reason to

extend this period we are all leaving on the 11th, and any staff members after us, -- >> i do not understand. >> commissioners, if that is all, we can move to public comment. members of the public -- this is within the subject matter and the jurisdiction of the commission. and i have no speaker cards. >> i went through the files of next week's hearing, and i was not certain about the rules. i want to read the current

rules. this is due to the commission two weeks in advance of the hearing. i keep bringing this up. we have 120 unit projects, and this is not a complicated case because this is what you should have considered on the triangle. if you look at these rules, you are allowed one week. on a d.r. and a c.u. this is not a c.u. this is a major project if you have one here. like the project today, the others that have been cont roversial. the staff rdisregards this.

everything is two weeks in the rules. and i ask the planning director to start enforcing the rules. thank you. >> and is there any additional public comment? general public, and is closed and the meeting is adjourned.

hello, and welcome to the department of elections ranked-choice voting instructional video. this video is part of the department of elections' ranked-choice voting outreach campaign and is designed to educate san francisco voters about ranked-choice voting. today we will learn what ranked-choice voting is, and who is elected using this new voting method. we will also talk about what the ranked-choice ballot looks like and how to mark it correctly. finally, we'll see how the ranked-choice voting process works and show you an example of an election using ranked-choice voting. so, what is ranked-choice voting? in march of 2002, san francisco voters adopted a charter amendment to implement ranked-choice voting, also known as the instant run-off voting.

san francisco voters will use ranked-choice voting to elect most local officials by selecting a first-choice candidate in the first column on the ballot, and different second- and third-choice candidates in the second and third columns respectively. this makes it possible to elect local officials with a majority of votes, more than 50%, without the need for a separate run-off election. in san francisco, ranked-choice voting applies to the election of members of the board of supervisors, the mayor, sheriff, district attorney, city attorney, treasurer, assessor-recorder, and public defender. ranked-choice voting does not apply to elections for local school board and community college board members, nor the election of state or federal officials. ranked-choice voting does not affect the adoption of ballot

measures. when voters receive their ballot, either at a polling place or as an absentee ballot in the mail, it will consist of multiple cards. voters will receive cards that contain contests for federal and state offices, as well as for state propositions and local ballot measures. for ranked-choice voting contests, voters will receive a separate ranked-choice ballot card. the design of the ranked-choice ballot card and the instructions to rank three choices are new. the ranked-choice ballot is designed in a side-by-side column format that lists the names of all candidates in each of the three columns. when marking the ranked-choice ballot, voters select their first-choice candidate in the first column by completing the arrow pointing to their choice. for their second-choice, voters select a different candidate in the second column by completing the arrow pointing to their choice.

for their third-choice, voters select a different candidate in the third column by completing the arrow pointing to their choice. voters wishing to vote for a qualified write-in candidate for any of their three choices can write in a candidate's name on the line provided and they must complete the arrow pointing to their choice. keep in mind a voter should select a different candidate for each of the three columns of the ranked-choice ballot card. if a voter selects the same candidate in more than one column, his or her vote for that candidate will count only once. also, a voter's second choice will be counted only if his or her first-choice candidate has been eliminated and a voter's third choice will be counted only if both his or her first- and second-choice candidates have been eliminated. we have talked about how to mark the ranked-choice ballot. now let's look at how ranked-choice voting works.

initially every first-choice vote is counted. any candidate who receives a majority, more than 50% of the first-choice votes, is determined to be the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the first-choice votes, a process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes begins. first, the candidate who received the fewest number of first-choice votes is eliminated from the race. second, voters who selected the eliminated candidate as their first choice will have their vote transferred to their second choice. third, all the votes are recounted. fourth, if any candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, he or she is declared the winner. if no candidate receives more than 50% of the votes, the process of eliminating candidates and transferring votes is repeated until one candidate has a winning majority.

in this example, we have three candidates: candidate a, candidate b and candidate c. in this example, we have three candidates: candidate a, candidate b., and candidate c. after all the first-choice votes are counted, none of the three candidates has received more than 50%, or a majority of the first-choice votes cast. candidate a has received 25% of the votes, candidate b has received 40% of the votes, and candidate c has received 35% of the votes. . because no candidate received a majority, the candidate who received the fewest number of first-choice votes, candidate a, is eliminated from the race. voters who picked candidate a as their first-choice candidate will have their vote transferred to their second-choice candidate. of the voters who picked candidate a as their first choice candidate, 15% chose candidate b as their second-choice candidate and 10% chose candidate c as their second-choice candidate.

these votes are then applied to candidates b and candidate c and the votes are recounted. we see now that candidate b has 55% of the votes and candidate c has 45% of the vote. candidate b now has more than 50% of the votes and is determined to be the winner. thank you for watching. we hope that you have learned more about ranked-choice voting and who is elected using this method. you have seen the ranked-choice ballot, learned how to correctly mark it, and learned how the ranked-choice voting process works. if you have any further questions about ranked-choice voting, please contact us at: department of elections, city hall, room 48, 1 dr. carlton b. goodlett place, san francisco, california 94102.