further comment. and mr. fried, one thing that i would say is that obviously the suggestions you're getting here, it may be that commissioners after the meeting think of additional points that they should always feel free to contact you. >> absolutely. i'm always available for anything else. chairperson campos: ok. thank you. why don't we open it up to public comment. thank you, mr. fried, for your good work on this. please come forward. >> good afternoon, again, commissioners. eric brooks, representing san francisco green party and the local grass roots organization, our city. it's really, really exciting to see this preliminary report because it shows exactly what advocates of rank choice voting have always said, which is that voter participation is higher

during rank choice elections and you can -- if you're part of any given political cadre that wants to downplay that and make look like that's not the case, you can do what happened over the last year and go to the media with cherry picked numbers and make it look like participation is lower during rank choice and higher during a runoff but we're seeing from actual numbers that have been crurched that that's not true, and that rank choice voting, as we've always said, increases participation. and so that's really good to see. and i would say, as far as looking for more information, i think it would be good to compare where we can in rank choice elections where people did have more than three choices, compare the error rate between that and what we had. also, ballot styles could be very important. you know, what the ballot looks like and how easy it is for the voter to understand and i'd like

to see that compared, like, what our ballot style was compared to other ballot styles that have been used for rank choice. commissioner olague: i think that would be interesting. >> i wanted to put in one note on the touch screen idea. sounds like it would be really effective. however, whenever that subject comes up, it's really important for voter clarity, hard-liners to get up and say that if we were to go to touch screens, it would be absolutely imperative that when a voter gets done voting, a physical, printed out ballot comes out right in their hands that they look at and take to the voting machine to put a hard paper ballot that they have seen with their own eyes into the collection basket so that nobody can game the system electronically but it's really exciting to see that what we've been saying for years and years and years is exactly right which is that when you have rank choice, you get more participation, not less, and of

course we save money which is a big deal. chairperson campos: thank you, mr. brooks. next speaker, please. >> hello, my name is david carey. i'd like to thank mr. fried for the information that he's putting together. i'd like to point out a few items about it. one is that when he's comparing san francisco's june primaries to november turnout and making some comparisons to that to some of the proposals that have been put further, it's important to keep in mind that those proposals actually proposed some september primaries where turnout is likely to be much, much lower than it is in june primaries with other state ballot items on them and so if you had a september primary, even bumping things up to 80% to 90% isn't going to get you to 50% of the november turnout. the other thing that i'm glad mr. fried is showing is that

san francisco has elections where the percentage of invalid over-voter ballots is highest and that's not rank choice voting. it's the plurality multicandidate elections for the school board and community college board so if san francisco really wanted to focus on how can you reduce the amount of invalid votes, we'd focus on what can we do for those elections, not rank choice voting. the other point is, that it's not just the invalid votes, it's the exhausted votes, as well. for example, compared to the mayoral 2010 election, using rank choice voting, or, excuse me, the mayoral 2011 rank choice voting, and the 2010 school board election, the school board election had a higher rate of exhausted votes than the mayoral

election did. so doing something about those plurality multicandidate elections could improve -- would be the place to start for improving both rates of invalid votes and exhausted votes. the other thing i'd point out is that the multicandidate plurality elections, when you mark those ballots, you mark three candidates all in a column. that's exactly the sort of voting that is invalid for rank choice voting and for a small number percentage of voters, that's a source of confusion. so turning the school board and the college board elections into multicandidate rank choice voting would actually simplify things for voters and would help reduce the rates of over-voting in the rank choice voting elections we have already. thank you. chairperson campos: thank you very much. is there any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed.

again, mr. fried, thank you very much for your good work and we look forward to the additional information. madam clerk, please call the next item. madam clerk: item no. 5, consideration and final approval of sf lafco budget for fiscal year 2012/2013. chairperson campos: mr. fried? >> we presented the budget at last month's meeting for a first vote. this is the second vote. no changes have been made to what we're recommending. the staff is recommending that while we have the legal ability to accept all the money that the city offers to us under state statute that we are actually recommending to return that money for this year but simply maintain our rights to the allocated amount in future years should we need it. chairperson campos: great. thank you very much. is there any public comment on item 5. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, if we can get a motion, motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner olague, if we can take that without objection. without objection and the item

finally passes. thank you. item 6, please? madam clerk: item no. 6, authorization to extend two lafco staff positions. chairperson campos: miss miller. >> as you will recall, we have board of supervisors by ordinance passed lafco with monitoring and advising the san francisco public utilities commission and implementation of the c.c.a. program. to further that task, we entered into an mou with sfpuc in 2009 which provided non-general fund funds to provide for those activities and subsequently this commission, through working with city and county staff, authorized the hiring of two staff -- or, actually, the setting up of two staff positions for that work. mr. fried was hired in our senior program officer position. the community development assistant, we did originally

fill. that person left the job. i've not refilled it because that position is really for once we get into program launch, but those two positions are term positions and they were to be termed out as of august of 2012. so this item before you is to extend that, since we've had an extension of the launch of our c.c.a. program, is to extend that term another year. by that time, we believe the program will be launched. if you've got other questions, i'd be happy to answer them. chairperson campos: thank you very much, miss miller. i think the extension makes sense. i think that at the time this happened, the expectation was that we wouldn't need the positions for a period longer than what was originally intended but clearly that's not the case so i think it makes sense to do that. and the extension is for how long? >> for one year. chairperson campos: for one year. >> one fiscal year.

chairperson campos: great. any comments or questions? why don't we open it up to public comment? any member of the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues can we get a motion to authorize that? a motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner olague, if we can take that without objection. item no. 7, madam clerk? madam clerk: approve the extension of the mou with the san francisco public utilities commission for the c.c.a. program. chairperson campos: thank you and before we turn it over to ms. miller, mr. fried, congratulations i think are in order. ms. miller. >> this is similar to the previous item which is once again the mou. we thought the program would be launched by this time so the mou had a term date which we're beyond now so we want to extend it until june 2013. chairperson campos: great. thank you. another one-year extension. any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner olague. if we can take that without

objection? item 8. madam clerk: item no. 8 is public comment. chairperson campos: any member of the public who would like to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of lafco not otherwise on the agenda. seeing none, public comment is done. item 9. madam clerk: item no. 9 is future agenda items. chairperson campos: colleagues, any future agenda items? any member of the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. last item. madam clerk: last item isa, jowrnt. chairperson campos: meeting adjourned. thank you, everyone, and have a good weekend. thank you to staff and to the clerk for their good work.

>> everyone deserves a bank account. in san francisco, anyone can have a bank account. everyone is welcome, even if you are not a u.s. citizen or have bad credit. qualifying for a bank account is simple, just lived or worked in san francisco and had a form of id >> we started bank on san

francisco at six years ago. we wanted to make sure they know they have options, which would be more successful for them. ♪ >> check cashing stores can be found all over the city. they're convenient locations, with a hidden price. -- the convenient locations, with a hidden price. >> i got a refund check and they took out $200. >> i understand they have to make money, but they are a little high. >> people who used check passers -- cashers, they could

pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in fees. >> i do not have that kind of money. >> i would not have to pay it if i had a bank account. >> bank accounts are essential. >> most banks require information that may limited the pool of qualified applicants. encouraging them to return to on saved check passers. -- unsafe check cashers. they are more vulnerable to a robbery, loss, or theft. qualifying for a bank account is no longer a problem. >> great, thank you. >> even if you've had problems

with an account in the past, or never had an account, or in not a u.s. citizen, bank on sf makes it easier for you to have an account. >> it gives them no option but to go to a check casher. >> to find the account that is best for you, just follow these three easy steps. find a participating bank or credit union. call 211 and ask about the bank on sf account. asked about opening an account. a financial partner will guide you through this process and connect you with the account that is best for you.

during some form of identification. -- bring it some form of identification. now you opened your account. simple, right? that is exactly how that was meant to be. you can even access your account online and sets up direct deposit. it is a real bank account. >> we see a lot of people who could not open checking accounts. people there do not have two id's. it is exciting to help these people. >> it has been a great partnership. we are able to offer checking, savings, money markets, certificates to people who might not be able to get account anywhere else. even if you that a previous bank account at