. >> president: thank you, mr. carroll. i will at this time call to order the january 7th, 2022, meeting of the san francisco redistricting task force to order. by way of introduction, i am

the chair of the task force, reverend arnold townsend. mr. carroll, do you have any announcements? >> clerk: yes, mr. chair. the task force recognizes that public access to city services is essential and invites public participation in the following ways. each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes to speak. your opportunity to speak during today's public comment periods will be available to you by phone by dialling (415) 655-0001. then you would enter the meeting id for today's meeting. today's meeting id is 24806267041. after you've entered the meeting id, press the pound symbol twice to be connected to the meeting discussions. you will be connecting, but your line will be in muted in

listening mode only when your item of interest comes up speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television or streaming device and for those members participating in today's webex software, please raise your hand. doing so will add you to the speakers. alternatively, you may submit your public comment in writing. e-mail rdtf@sfgov.org. or you can commit your public comment in writing by u.s. post to our office in the clerk's office. this is the redistricting task force care of the clerk's

office, room 244, san francisco city hall 1 dr. carlton b. good let place. of course, all of this contact information can be consulted on the front page of any of our task force agenda. and, mr. chair, that concludes my announcements. >> chair townsend: thank you, mr. carroll. i want to say just because of some of the correspondence we've received and conversations that have come to me as i'm out in the public and many people are concerned and wondering how we could have removed certain neighborhoods out of certain districts and i just want the public to know you may have seen maps during all of that. none of them are from us. we have not approved any maps. ultimately, yes, the maps will

come from the redistricting task force even though some people are under the illusion that the board of supervisors can fix whatever we do that they don't like, that is not the case either. and so i just want people to be aware. i also know that some of our members as well as the public are anxious for us to start drawing and submitting maps. yes, we all want to do that, that's what we're here for. i am reluctant to do that without hearing from the public. we serve and our desire is to link the needs of the public of the citizens of san francisco and i think it would be improper to do a lot of drawing until we have heard from them. so we will start hearing from them and then we will start our map making schedule very soon and at that time, we can all

get very busy and hopefully we can come out at the end of the process friends at least. but that's where we are now. thank you, mr. clerk. item number one. >> clerk: agenda item number one is a roll call. members, when you hear your name please indicate you are present that you are here. [roll call] mr. chair, we have a quorum. >> chair townsend: wonderful. thank you.

next item, please. >> clerk: agenda item two is an update to regular and special meetings schedule. members who wish to make public comment should call the public call-in number. that call-in number is (415) 655-0001. enter the meeting id of 24866267041. press pound twice followed by three to enter the system to speak. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and you may begin your comments. for those interested in the teleconferencing system webex, please indicate so by raising your hand within the webex meeting. doing so will add you to the speakers awaiting recognition. mr. chair. >> chair townsend: thank you.

i believe number two is a carry over discussion i believe we had on monday night in putting together our schedule. there were some shifts and some changes and i am hopeful that mr. wilson ing is here. before i go to him, vice chair reiner, did you have any comments you wanted to make concerning the schedule? >> vice chair: no, chair townsend. >> chair townsend: okay. thank you. >> thank you, chair. good afternoon members of the task force. my colleague joe atkins here will be doing a screen share shortly with the latest version of the redistricting task force proposed in district meetings schedule last updated from our conversation on monday. and here it is.

thank you, joe. control screen, perfect. and to just quickly recap that last meeting, the proposed updates are highlighted in the calendar provided in your packets displayed before you as well that we're adding two additional meetings per request of the chair for the purpose of facility reservations if we are going to be conducting meetings in person and then adding proposed district focused order per the chair and vice chair's recommendations and providing anticipated locations in the notes column that you see before you to plan ahead. based on some of the comments we heard on monday, the packets are reflective of the few changes. and also for members of the public to follow along as well. the updates since monday are we updated the monday,

february 14th meeting to wednesday, february 16th, in observance of valentine's day. the april 6th meeting is to start at 5:30 p.m. the task force had previously adopted a 10:00 a.m. start time for this meeting at the november 17th, 2021, meeting. so this would be a proposed amendment to that previously approved start time. and we also received feedback at the last meeting specifically regarding districts 1, 2, and 7 occurring in march. i have made a side note of that, but we don't believe that ordering of these districts would have a material impact on how the lines would be drawn for the less impacted districts. but i will defer to the task force amongst you all for further deliberation and discussion on the specific ordering of these districts and i'll be glad to reflect any changes that the body would

like. before we do that, i want to just ask the task force to confirm or rather reconfirm whether in-person meetings will occur starting on january 14th, 2022. at this time, our office believes there may be some conflicting opinions based on feedback we've received from members as well as public feedback that we received on our end. at the january 3rd meeting, this task force confirmed they would like to host in-person meetings. with the chair and vice chair, we've been advised that in-person meetings may not occur and we need the task force to take some actions to affirmatively let us know whether in-person meetings would occur between the 14th through the end of april and the select dates were chosen at the last meeting, but we wanted

this for operational planning and staffing planning, we do want to confirm those things. a few deadlines for your consideration on our end, our clerk john carol will need to confirm the agenda in advance of the meeting on the 14th to meet the five-day noticing requirements in consultation with our personnel and i.t. units, we also need to plan on our end any recruiting and logistics if we're going to take meetings in person because we are as clerk calvillo previously mentioned, we are recruiting for two as needed temporary eeuchltd t. positions and this will be the determining factor. and we want to be able to be clear about what the schedule and expectations are for potential candidates that are interested in this position just to be made upfront and just to make a note, absent of additional i.t. staff, our

resource and availability is to support in-person meetings is stretched incredibly thin. basically, everybody that you see administering this meeting inclusive of our i.t. staff, that's essentially the team that we have, and we are trying to expand our envelope with additional staffing and we will need to determine what their work schedule looks like based on what the meeting demands are for the next several months. operationally, we will need to provide the affirmative to the locations. many of these places are generously providing accommodations without cost to the task force with consideration that we are also in the middle of a pandemic. so as a business courtesy, i want to be able to let these facilities know that if there's any chance that a venue may not be used that we provide them sufficient noticing and setting just expectations upfront and

hopefully not something that would be changed as we embark on the next three months. and then let's see. we're also working on how we can be considerate of any household concerns and then also as a reminder, sfgov tv will not be able to provide any in-person meetings will be

streamed. today, on behalf of my team, the board divisions and also on behalf of chair townsend and vice chair reiner we have two questions before you today. will the task force be having in-person meetings beginning january 14th through april? this would from the operational perspective, this is an all or nothing question in consideration with what we can accommodate as well as consideration of sufficient time for public noticing, outreach, and then also hiring and personal staffing, planning. the second question we have is will the task force approve the additional dates and times of the calendar we have presented before you today specifically adding the february 16th and march 14th meeting dates which are currently not on the schedule. changing the april 6th meeting

start time from 10:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. per chair townsend's request and then confirming the district focused meeting order and if meetings are in person to affirm a definitive end time so that we can reserve facilities for that specific time frame and we look forward to the task force members' deliberation and action on this and i'm available for any questions. >> chair townsend: thank you, mr. ing for such a thorough report. members. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see member pierce awaiting recognition. >> chair townsend: member pierce, let us know what we're doing. >> member: yeah. i have two questions to redirect back to mr. ing. number one, if we are meeting in person, what are the capacity of each of the facilities that we're going to

be meeting in and i also would like to know are those capacities reduced capacities to allow for distancing? and in the event that we have overflow, do all of those facilities have the capacity to handle overflow so that we can sufficiently distance? i mean, this sounds like a death sentence to me for some of the general public, so i'm really concerned about that and i will take my questions at the end of every other members' comments, but i do need those questions answered before we vote. >> member pierce, wilson ing. with regard to the capacity needs facility, one of the minimum criteria we had when vetting some of these locations was they had to have a minimum

of 100+ head count and with regard to distancing, currently in accordance with the current health order, there's no distancing requirement for public meetings i don't believe and the city attorney's office can correct me if i'm wrong. but each individual facility may or may not have their own house rules they may wish to implement. and then with regards to overflow, we are anticipating all facilities will have overflow, but we're also not anticipating the capacity limit to be reached at this point based on our assessment of the volume of public callers at this point, website traffic, at least on our end unless arranged otherwise. >> member: thank you for the

response. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see member hernandez gil awaiting recognition. >> chair townsend: please. >> member: thank you. my understanding is that the mayor's supplemented proclamation requires all persons attending in-person meetings, regardless and the public may have ended in person, but they also have to have the option of attending virtually. to me, the main thing is addressing whether all of us on the task force are comfortable attending these in-person meetings because we understand the public must in any way be able to participate in the meetings with us. we all hopefully have seen the numbers with this covid spike. i feel comfortable attending these meetings, but i have to admit that i'm hesitant and particularly if it gets worse,

i think it would be prudent to do so. so i would like to get a sense. i guess from everybody on the task force to see if they want to meet in person because it's either we all go or nobody goes. >> chair townsend: mr. carroll, is there anyone else? >> clerk: there is additional members of the task force and i also recognize carin mcdonald who was the next person in the roster if you'd like to recognize her. >> chair townsend: i'd like to get the members first. >> clerk: okay. the next member is member cooper. >> member: thank you, mr. ing. i think that was a really wonderful good presentation. i guess my questions are about just looking right ahead of this next meeting at city hall

just to of clarify that we'll be able to have people, you know, the public in person as well as remotely, but what that would look like in terms of the rules around vaccination and masks that would go on next week? >> let's see. with regards to masking and distancing, masking will be required within city hall. distancing may not. and i would also defer to the city attorney's office as well because the up coming -- if we are going to have in-person meetings, city hall is not going to be the only location that in-person meetings would occur and if there's certain locations with their own individual house rules such as vaccination or temperature checks or distancing that's

required that city hall may not have whether that poses like logistical hurdle for us, i would defer to the city attorney's office. >> chair townsend: i would like to hear from the city attorney as well. >> good afternoon. let me just make sure i understand the question. so, wilson, your question is whether we can use other locations that may have rules different than the rules applied to city hall? is that right? >> member: yeah. one, under current city policy in city hall, just only the masking requirement is applicable to city hall. >> that's correct. >> member: and then since we also have additional locations that the redistricting task force would move around to, if they have their own individual house rules whether uniform application of those screening protocols or rules would need

to apply. >> i'm sorry uniform between what? if they have their own house rules, i think we have to respect them. >> member: okay. >> right. i assume you would have to respect those rules. maybe they'd be flexible about them. i assume you have to be respectable to use their facility. >> member: okay. so for all the locations, the minimum requirement is masking and if each individual facility layers additional rules, then that is at the location's discretion, correct? >> yeah. and if you don't mind a suggestion, it may be useful as we're building out this charter spread sheet that you're developing, you may want to note if there are locations that have particular house rules that we should pay attention to. they may put on persons of the public to attend. in that case, they know sort of in advance or maybe this could be something on the agenda then they should definitely go to

that meeting remotely. >> member: two more. quick followup. are we allowed to make our own rules in regards to vaccinations? >> i suppose if the task force could make rules as guidance for wilson and his colleagues in terms of what is acceptable as conditions for remote locations if that's the question, member cooper. if you want to provide some guidance to wilson and others i'm sure they would take it into consideration. i would say that could become very challenging because as i mentioned, it's difficult to find locations in the city. so keep that in mind. and certainly, well, i probably

don't have anything else to say on that front. certainly, i'm trying to stay abreast of all the different rules changing around covid and omicron, but i will confess i'm not a public health expert, but i trust the task force will be reasonable with whatever rules it wants to adopt. >> one for followup. you mentioned a sort of all or nothing when we talked about in-person meetings or not. can you elaborate a little bit more on that. let's say that we choose to take these next few meetings off the table because of the current omicron wave, does that mean that we're sort of shutting off the opportunity to go back to the public february, march, april? >> yeah. so when i say all or nothing, i'm speaking purely from the operational standpoint because if we are going to be going off site, we are also recruiting additional staff and if, you

know, if you guys meet in-person for certain dates, but not other dates, that may change the scope of the candidates that we are trying to recruit for. so, for example, one of the basic requirements when we need to know when we hire a potential candidate or whether a candidate would accept the position or not is knowing what the hours of operation or locations that they wouldn't potentially need to go to are. so we do need to know whether we're hiring somebody for the next three months or multiple candidates for the next three months or are we just having some stand by assistance for certain dates where we're going to be in person and some not. and that was what i was getting

at. >> okay thanks. >> chair townsend: i thought that all or nothing meant if we have public meetings, in-person meetings that all of us have to attend or we do a remote meeting. >> that is true as well. >> chair townsend: i don't see how we can dictate the rules in their facility. i don't see us telling them we're going to do this and we can't demand it is what i'm

saying. mr. carroll, are there others? >> clerk: there. mr. jeremy lee is in the roster. >> chair townsend: mr. jeremy lee. >> member: okay. thank you. so i can speak for myself in terms of what i'm comfortable with. i think redistricting is just as impairtive to the public and providing access to them is essential so to me that outweighs any risks at least at present. so i'm fully comfortable going out into the public. with that, every member of the public can also participate online and so i would ask that member ho and member hernandez gil, when doing that outreach, make that abundantly clear that members of the public still can

participate electrically or in person. i still want to reiterate my desire to have a meeting dedicated for map making somewhere in between the long line of indistrict meetings as well as a weekend meeting preferably in april. the last weekend meeting on this schedule is early march and i think it is a disservice to the public if we do not provide a weekend opportunity for them to participate closer to the deadline. thank you. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see member pierce next in the roster. >> chair townsend: member

pierce. >> member: i can wait until our consultant goes or i can go right now. >> chair townsend: go right now. you've got the mic. >> member: let me be clear, we are delivering meals to people and i happen to live with my 75-year-old mother and help with my 99-year-old grandfather. if we change to meet in public, that will require me to spend the rest of the process in quarantine so that i do not indanger their lives. i really feel strongly about this because i am holding hands and attending funerals right now. that is since member lee put his position out there, if we vote to do in person, i will show up, but this creates a

real hardship and a life-threatening situation for me. i also have concerns with the age of both our chair and vice chair although they appear to be healthier than i am, i know what those age differences mean in terms of outcomes because i'm seeing it directly. turning it back over to you, mr. chair. >> chair townsend: mr. carroll, who's next. >> clerk: there are further names in the roster. i do want to jump in for a moment to mention that by action of the task force during the monday meeting, the task force did adopt three in-district meetings. i want to make sure everyone knows the three meetings are presently scheduled. you could make the change to remove them, but i just want to make sure everyone as a baseline knew that's where we stand right now. and, mr. chair, i see that vice chair reiner is next in the queue. >> chair townsend: yes.

thank you so much. >> vice chair: i've spent the last couple of years isolating because of either family situations or because of myself just to protect myself. i worry that if we do decide based on what i see all over the country and what i'm seeing here, if we do decide to have an in-person meeting, we are going to take the timeline of people being ill or potentially getting ill and expanded over a longer period of time than if we decide during this real surge in january to continue to have the meetings with our districts, but to do them remotely because the surge is definitely happening. it's just starting. and i'm very concerned that i want to be in the district. i can't wait to meet -- there are some members of the task force i've never seen in

person. i feel the task force would operate in a much more collaborative and wonderful manner if we could at least meet together. so i'm really anxious to meet with my colleagues and the members, but i think that we would be inviting a long term turmoil for the task force and difficulty if we didn't do the first three meetings for now for january and see how this variant really spreads in san francisco. we're starting to -- we're a very dense city. we're starting to see some very serious problems and i am very hesitant to meet in person regardless of the fact that we said that we'd love to do that. we're looking at numbers here that are very discerning. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see member hernandez gil next in

the roster. >> member: thank you. so based on these past few comments from task members and also a couple of comments that i've received from members of the public in district 6, i do not believe that it's prudent for us to meet in person over the next two weeks. right. at least until the 22nd. potentially things could change by the 29th. i don't know if that's going to happen. it's something we can review as we get closer to that date, but i am going to make the motion for these next two meetings, the one on the 14th and the 22nd for them to be district specific, for them to be done online. i believe that while there are members of the public that prefer to attend in-person meetings and i acknowledge and recognize that and i appreciate that. i also want to be prudent to them to be attending while

there's a surge going. >> member: member pierce, i second. >> chair townsend: there's a motion on the floor. are there others who want to comment before we vote? >> clerk: mr. chair, there are still further members of the task force in the queue. >> chair townsend: i understand. i was just checking on the members. so we will go to the role, but i want the other members get their comments in now. >> clerk: member cooper is next in the roster. >> member: thank you. yeah. i'm supportive of this motion. i agree with member jeremy lee that we do need that. having in-person meetings are very important in a but just seeing how this is going but i think that carries a lot. i really would like to hear

from every member if possible on peoples' own personal levels. i think that will help us as we go through decision not just now but carrying on and maybe we'll have to check in with folks and i think it would be nice to hear from everybody. personally, the bayview -- i am also 100% willing to defer to even a minority of the task force if they really feel like that. i think that will also kind of reflect in the public as well i think a lot of the communities, they're looking to hit from the in-person side of our outreach and also community that is are going to be impacted and that are impacted by the virus. so i don't, you know, if the virus continues to get worse, i don't think going out on

personal the people that want to get to that process. i hope if we do end up having to do our meetings remote, we find some other way to reach these communities without having the internet or these meetings. but that will be for another time. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see member chasel lee next in the roster. >> member: thank you, mr. chair. i am supportive of member hernandez gil's motion. i'll say that from the outset. i also agree with him. i can corroborate his statement about members of the public in district 6 who are you think comfortable with meeting in-person in the middle of a surge. and this goes beyond just the strict six. we're drawing districts for living people. we need those people to be alive first and foremost.

alive and well. i think we need to keep that in mind as we're going forward. yes, we do value in-person input. as vice chair reiner says. meeting people in person makes for a more collaborative atmosphere, but we can only collaborate with each other anding with the public if all of us are alive and well. so i think it is prudent to go with member hernandez gil's motion. my main concern then is mr. ing's references to his staffing issues if we need to somehow annul that in some shape or form should we take this course of action. thank you. >> chair townsend: thank you. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see

member castillon. >> chair townsend: mr. castillon. >> member: thank you, mr. chair. >> clerk: i think that your microphone has cut out. >> member: can you hear me? >> clerk: we can hear you now but we just missed all of what you just said. >> member: okay. i will try to speak very closely to my computer. i'll keep my comments short, but i know member cooper was hoping to hear from everyone regarding their personal feelings towards the current situation. i'm generally supportive of member hernandez gil's motion in this particular capacity. i also think that sometimes actually when we have in-person meetings, it can be a burden for the public at times having to sit through long meetings

while in order to wait for their opportunity for public comment. so i do want to keep in mind there are ways in which virtual can increase access to the public. >> clerk: mr. chair, we've reached the end of the queue to the side q2 representative carin mcdonald has been taken out of the roster and is no longer awaiting recognition. >> chair townsend: okay. then at this point, i think we should go to the public. >> clerk: okay. mr. chair, we're working now with matthew ignao from the department of technology. if you wish to comment on the regular and in-person meeting schedule. call the number (415) 655-0001. the meeting id number is

24806267041. after you've entered the meeting id, press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting then press star followed by the number three to enter the queue to speak. for those members of the public who are connected through the meeting through the webex teleconference meeting, please raise your hand to indicate you would like to be added to the queue of speakers that we're generating waiting recognition. and for those on hold, please continue to wait until you hear the prompt informing you your line has been unmuted and you may then begin your comments. speakers will have three minutes to speak. can you please connect us to our first caller. >> caller: hello. >> clerk: please begin. >> caller: okay. hi. this is jenn with the legal women voters of san francisco. i just want to say that i really appreciate the

discussion that you're having today. these are some tough decisions and i also want to mention, you know, that for most of the local jurisdictions in the state of california, you have had to work on this process in 2021, more or less most of them have done this process virtually for the los angeles city, they have done all their meetings virtually. i know for los angeles county redistricting commission, they did at least one meeting that was hybrid where they did it in person and a virtual at the same time and i know from one organizer who was present there said that only 20 people more or less showed up for the in-person whereas more folks ended up calling in to give public comment. i just wanted to bring this up

because, you know, there are a lot of redistricting commissions across the state of california that have already done this and have already had to do this virtually or in some version hybrid and that it would be in the interest of the redistricting task force to seek out those commissions and ask for advice on how they're doing this process especially with the surge and i appreciate the option regardless of in-person or virtual and that i know in previous discussions, it was mentioned about doing video public comments about having recordings ahead of time and so that may be something to explore as well. but overall, thank you for this discussion. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. could we have the next caller, please. >> caller: can you hear me

now? >> clerk: please begin. >> caller: all right. david pillpell. i agree that the task force members, staff, and the public are great at this time. so i would continue to meet remotely and monitor the situation as circumstances may change in the next three months. i also did some research in the last few days on the question of regular and special meetings and want to point out to you and to the city attorney present, the brown act again 54945a and the sunshine ordinance and 67.6a requires setting the time and place for regular meetings. the current adopted task force by laws in article 6 section 1 have the time, but not the location. i think that seemed fine at the time, but now with the

possibility of having actual meetings, there are some issue that is come up about 15-day notice and there may be other issues on the difference between regular and special meetings so i would encourage you to consider a by law amendment in the future to add the regular meeting location to article 6, section 1 and note in the brown act and in the sunshine ordinance in particular, 67.13 barriers to attendance prohibited and there may be other requirements that apply that talk about not discriminating or adding conditions to attendance and that could be interpreted to layering, adding or layering conditions that an outside location may impose as a condition or barrier to attendance for various folks.

so the bottom line is i think we are well served by continuing to meet remotely at this point and let's just see how things go. i like you all. i want you all to be safe. i want to be safe. i -- we can't afford anybody to get sick and anybody to be down for the count here. thanks for listening. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. can we have the next caller, please? >> that was the last caller. >> clerk: mr. chair, that was the last caller. >> chair townsend: thank you so much. before we go any further member comments -- >> clerk: just real quick, mr. chair, if you can close public comment. >> chair townsend: i'm sorry. public comment is closed. the. >> clerk: thank you. >> chair townsend: i think it's no secret to any of you that i have been anxiously awaiting with tiptoe anticipation of our public meetings because i just kind of

like what goes on with in-person meetings. but quite frankly, in may, i'll be 79, you know, and while my doctor is amazed at my health as am i because it's certainly not because i took care of myself, i just don't take chances and i haven't taken them for almost two years now. i don't want to start because of this task force. it is a -- i mean, we're looking at tv -- we're looking at the views, we know what's happening. so i don't think anyone would hold it against us if we would hold off on the public meetings that are scheduled now, the next couple, make them virtual and we still hopefully in the second district meeting for some of these districts, the

ones that we're talking about now have more than one meeting and hopefully, we can get out to the public by then, but nothing is going to be -- nothing is urgent or serious enough to risk peoples' health when there is another way to do it. you know, i just don't think we need to make redrawing the district lines of russian roulette for the public or any of us for that matter, you know, we'll take our risk and see what happens. it's just not necessary. there are things that we'd take that risk for every one of them. we can go to any further member comments if you all have them. >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any further members of the task force, but i do see d.c.h. awaiting recognition. >> thank you, chair townsend.

sorry to jump in just before you're going to vote on the motion. but i did have one idea or suggestion to share with the task force. if we are in the short term going to move to some remote meetings for understandable public health meetings and we are still going to have some district focused discussions and hopefully some district based feedback from the public, i wonder whether it makes sense to have such discussions on multiple districts where some of these remote meetings come up. so if we're not tethered to in-person meeting locations, you know, going to district 6 to have district 6 feedback and we're doing remote instead, i have to hear about district 6 and district 3, for example. i think that time is running short unfortunately for this task force. we are essentially three months away from when we need to be done with this project. and remote meetings may be a way where we can accelerate our ability to receive that public comment and feedback.

just a suggestion for you all to consider. >> chair townsend: thank you. that is intriguing and perhaps we are to at our next regular meeting, perhaps that is something that we would want to explore and especially since you never know until you get in a meeting, but since we suspect some meetings won't be as contentious as others, certainly, we may want to look at that and i would ask those of you who are looking at scheduling and putting these meetings together, it's not only outreach, but talking about how this might or -- and let's look at how this might work. but at this point, if you can go to the vote on the motion restate and we'll take a vote.

>> clerk: mr. chair, i do see further members have entered their names into the roster. >> chair townsend: if you're going to talk about his proposal, could we hold that until after the vote because that has nothing to do with the vote. >> i'll hold it until after the vote. >> chair townsend: anybody else. >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any other names in the roster. we heard a motion offered by member hernandez gil and seconded by member pierce to make changes to a portion of what was adopted on monday. this will be to make it so that the january 14th, friday, special meeting to begin at 3:00 p.m. instead of occurring in city hall room 400, it will be a remote meeting like we're having presently and also for the special meeting on january 22nd, a saturday meeting that will begin at 10:00 which presently is

scheduled to occur at third baptist church that would also be held as a remote meeting like we're having right now. from that motion, it would preserve the special meeting location at first congregational church 1300 following. i can take the vote on it now. on that motion, [roll call] mr. chair, there are nine ayes

on that motion. >> chair townsend: thank you, mr. carroll. mr. chasel lee, did you want to make your comment at this time? >> member: yeah. sure. thank you, mr. chair. i am intrigued by the suggestion as you are, mr. chair, however, i am somewhat weary of it because it warps the discussion a bit. we chose to do district centric meetings. if we are to have multiple district discussions in the same meeting, i would urge -- i would suggest having those districts be diametrically -- >> chair townsend: hold on. my suggestion would be and i

know i'm cutting you off and i apologize that we make this a discussion at our next meeting where everyone can participate because you're going to do this now and someone may respond and then someone else and now we're discussing on issues that are not agendized as well as taking time away from the already agendized item. but i'd like to make more comments is during the agenda period agenda item, we may want to set this for discussion. would you be agreeable to that, mr. chasel lee? >> member: thank you, mr. chair. that suggestion makes complete sense to me. >> chair townsend: very good. >> clerk: mr. chair, just so

everyone knows, we have drafted and translated and posted an agenda for the january 12th meeting that is next wednesday's meeting. it is posted online and there is updates to the regular and special meetings. we have also and translated an agenda for the friday, 2022 special meeting in conform answer of the action will now need to be changed. i can take care of the clerkal

clerical bits. we need to post that agenda before the five days out from that meeting. so sunday it requires translation staff. it was written to have a district focus of district six which we can update and change, but if on the january 12th meeting, you attended to make changes to the meeting that was going to happen later, the train will have already left the station. i will make sure everyone understands that. mr. chair, i see while i've been yamering that member hernandez gil has added his

name to the roster. >> chair townsend: member hernandez gil. >> member: yeah. i wanted to make a comment on the personnel issue that was brought up earlier. given the fact this task force just this past monday agreed to have the meetings in district and that we have now changed. i think it makes sense to continue with the hiring as if those meetings were still happening in person. i recognize that anybody who is brought on board might just end up sitting around for a couple of meetings. that's unfortunate, but it's still better to guarantee that we have somebody who is able to participate in all the meetings if they do happen in person. it's respectful to the workers and it's respectful to the staff who have been doing the hiring and that would help address this all or nothing issue that we have. i would rather make sure if we do go out into the public in the next few weeks that we have

enough staff already. >> chair townsend: thank you. i was thinking about that as well and, of course, i don't know how city policy and city hiring worked, but i would think since these sound like temporary hires that you may want to structure the hiring of notice that would say no more or no less than x amount of meetings or time. [please stand by]

>> but we will -- that recruitment will remain active and we'll continue interviewing candidates and vetting candidates as well. and based on the current schedule or the anticipated schedule that we have before us. i want to nag a reminder there's the february 16th, 2022

proposed meeting date as well as the march 14th, 2022 meeting date and the april 6th, meeting start time amendment to 5:30 p.m. that will also need to be addressed. >> thank you. can we move to the next item. >> clerk: member cooper is awaiting your recognition. >> i was just going to move to the things that were mentioned that we adopt so my motion is to add the february 16th, meeting shall the march 14th meeting asper the agenda packet as well as modifying the time for the april 6th meeting and as well as adding the times to the

meetings as outlined in the agenda packet and i don't know if it can get more specific than that. >> do i have a second. >> i second. >> it's been properly moved and seconds. mr. carole. >> clerk: on the motion offered by member cooper and seconds by member caseel lee to special a meeting on february 16th, 2022. to begin at 5:30 a wednesday and schedule a special meeting on march 14th, 2022 to begin at 5:30, as a monday and amend our meeting schedule on april 6th, 2022, at 5:30 instead of at 10:00 and then to accept the proposed end times. those end times documented in the paperwork in our task force packet, that's the summary on that motion. [roll call vote]

>> clerk: mr. chair, there are nine ayes once again. >> thank you. now we can move to item 3. i believe our mapping update. >> clerk: that's right. hang on just a moment, mr. chair. just catching up. a mapping update and this is a discussion and possible action item. we'll take public comment on this. we are joined this afternoon by karin macdonald and seth neil, i believe is here as well from q2 consulting. members of the public, who wish to provide public comment call

(415)655-0001 and enter the meeting id. press the pound symbol twice and press star followed by the number 3 if you wish to be entered to the queue to speak and please wait then until the system indicates that you have been unmuted and you may then begin your comments. for those interested members of the public who are connected to the meeting through the webex software, if you wish to speak, indicate so by raising your hand and within the web ex meeting and we'll add your name to the queue of speakers who are awaiting recognition. this item is called. >> thank you. ms. macdonald and mr. neil, you have the floor. >> thank you so much, chair, and vice-chair and members of the task force. it's great to be with you. it's nice to see everybody. just in general, i would like to

a a couple things about the mapping capabilities we have to support you and this is kind of in reference to the last item also and of course support you with any remote you probably know we just finalized the state of california which was completely completely remote to there's of knowledge there these days amongst mapping consultants so we will be able to support you no matter what you decide to do. from a mapping perspective, there are usually some logistical charges that we would definitely need to work with and his team on if you decide to go to hybrid meetings and those have quite a bit to do with the fact that if sometimes difficult for the public to see a screen

and the detail of a map when the mapping consult apartment in the members are in one rom and then everything is projected on to a screen. we can of course, figure out how the best work with you on that and make sure that everybody can see the maps and participate that way. i know there's a concern should that happen but it's definitely going to require a little bit of thinking out of the box to make sure that happens and people can participate fully remotely when you are not fully remote. just like one of the members of the public said, we have a little bit of experience also with hybrid meetings and we have the same experience that there were very few takers with hybrid

meetings that came to the in-person portion and most people were on-line and just making sure that we can support people that are on-line so that they can participate in the same way as people in the room will definitely require some logistical working around things. so, having said that, seth has been working on a number of things for you and thank you for all of your requests and i'm going to move things over to seth so he can give you an you update with respect to the tools and so fourth so thank you. >> thank you, good afternoon. chair townshend and members of the task force. i have some updates, especially to materials that are available on the task force website. and if i may share my screen, i can perhaps just show where some

of the things are now located and let people know where to find where maps are submitted. thank you. they are related to mapping and one update is the map submitted from the public has been updated to show the air table results for both the redistricting plans and the coy public input through the air table form so as you can see there's not been any submissions yet on that form but

these are the submissions that we have received so far for the re districting tool so these were posted to the website with the zip files but this breaks it out a bit more so you can see the different contents of it and i'll just briefly show how to use this. so you can see, each row is a plan that's been submitted. the date of submission, the general comment, which is expandable here, also you can see the pdf maps that include an overview. this is one you can zoom in more to see the map. as well as district-specific maps that include the percent deviation, names and commons, as it applies. you can still get the full attachments here and the attachment section and this

includes all the files as well as the geographic files, the shape files that you can load into a g.i.s. if you want to see them at full detail or work with them in any other way. you can see the text files that collect the comments that are for the over all plan and district-specific comments and overview of the pdf here. and as we get submissions here, they will be available here on this tab. i'll make sure people know where the coy input form is. also noting that we are working on some improvements to make it more central to find the coy form and so this page gives the instructions on what a coy is and how to submit and it has a link to the on-line form.

you could fill in the information about your community and when you press it it shows up in the air table that i just showed you. and as i mentioned, we are making some improvements to this page and so i'd like also to thank member cooper for his suggestions and working with us on that. so, let's see, stop sharing and i think those are the updates that i want to make sure that people saw and i know there's at of interest in seeing all the different types of submissions that people make. >> so a couple comments, thank you for this. this looks great. very easy to use. looking forward to going through the different maps. the sessions that first popped into my head and is it possible

to get higher resolution images on the actual pdf so they're a little more eligible. i can't even read this street names on them. it's charging to look at. if there's not maybe my second comment is that you mentioned that the shape files are there and do we as task force members have access to a gas program so that we can load the different submissions from the public over lay them and so we can better visualize and compare them? and this is for the district plans as well as the communities of interest? >> this is for the actual -- well, i guess, yeah. at least for the actual maps that we're getting from the public.

>> if i could perhaps answer the piece about the g.i.s. so since the district mapping process was starting to work will be live, we will have a professional mapping software available we can use to pull up any map that you would like to see on this screen so you would just let us know and we will import the map and then you can look at it in greater detail, if that helps. >> it's a good point to have and later it might. as for receiving the maps, right, it would be very useful to be able to compare them and visualize them at our own leisure individually as individuals. so that is a question and if we don't have access to that, at least having higher resolution images because as it stands, there are unusable at least for

me. >> thank you. >> we'll look into having higher resolution pdfs and the overview map is provided at a high resolution than the district-specific maps. and that one in part because we can provide a larger file for that one and for providing maps at that resolution for all the district. we had problem with e-mails not being able to be sent to e-mails but we can look into how we can have a high resolution on those. >> >> mr. chair,.

>> jeremy lee is waiting recognition. >> my question is from macdonald. >> i asked about adding chinese or filipino to the mapping tool and i just wanted to get an update on that. >> thank you so much for that question. i think we're working with john's shop on that and i will make sure that we can get an update on where that stands. >> ok. so, it is still currently in the works to make that happen? >> i am honestly not sure what the status is of this so let me check into it for you and get back to you. >> ok, great. thank you. and then another question for you, i have concerns around the

timeline around drawing draft maps, using your institutional knowledge of the last cycle, can you just give a high-level overview of just the amount of time it took the previous task forced to come up with a draft map and when they did that? >> yeah, thank you for those questions also. so, we've spent some time looking at your proposed schedule and the fact that you want to do the in district listening sessions, presumely before you start drawing lines so you can get some input from people. what i don't see on this schedule right now is an opportunity to actually focus on the entire city and county of san francisco and stop and just say ok, what is the innaught wee have received and start to put that together, pull it together and start to map.

i think the suggestion to look into combine something of these listening sessions for some of the districts might be good to open up some of the meetings to create that space so can you do that. i think that you should figure out collectively when you want to have a draft done and then work backwards and what the last task force did was, it had a listening session and it heard from all of the districts and started drawing. if you wanted to follow-up and obviously we would have to go

into the fall pretty much because right now you are not in every district. if you want to model your process on the last process, again, the suggestion to look into taking the five hours that you have for each directing listening session and perhaps say ok, the first hour that have or for this particular looking at the schedule opening up some of the meeting days that you have already agreed on when you know you are all available, and then saying ok, those are the days where one day we're going to just sit down and see what we have received and look at maps and the communities of interest and then just start work on a

draft over perhaps a period of three or four days and i would say a good time to shoot for would be maybe mid to end february depending on what you decide to do with respect to the listening sessions. whether you have a map, you will illicit more feedback obviously. people that perhaps did not feel like they needed to provide you with their community of interest, may come in and say, this draft actually splits my community of interest so now i rally do need you to know about it and so, you get that feedback and you get feedback like, you know, this just doesn't work for us and so fourth so you want to leave enough time afterwards to be able to review what you've done and get enough input so i would say, looking at the schedule, if you can open up some days, that really are just dedicated to the city and county coming up with the draft and having enough time to continue to work on iterations of that

draft, while you are also going out and listening again to feedback might be a good plan and i hope that made sense. >> y. of course. yes, of course. in your view, when we finish that listening and then what do you think is a sufficient amount of time. after the listening and develop that draft map. >> if you've heard, you have given everybody an opportunity to give you the first thoughts on the district and then you can start immediately to work on your draft. now again, this is an open and live mapping process so it will be iterations and as you heard from the public you may be changing some things if you

thought may work and you may make adjustments so perhaps just take three or four days and just try to get something out on paper and say this is our draft and we're going to stop right here for a little while and just input because it's also difficult for people to continue to provide input while the map is moving. so that is something to also keep in mind, you know. so i personally and these are the days when the draft map or maps are being developed and formulate what you need to know as a task force.

>> something that i think would be for the task force and the public as we start to head into district-specific meetings, is for us to have some data around the demographic make up of the existing districts so we can center ourselves with understanding the current profile of the different city and is this something that your firm would be able toll put together in advance of some of our upcoming district meetings? this would be something useful not only going into these meetings but something we can refer to through out the entire process. >> thank you for your question and also thank you for your e-mail. i have not responded to but we actually have the data that you have requested and i was going to send them to you this afternoon. >> ok.

excellent. >> we'll follow-up and put it together. exciting. thank you. >> that's all i have. >> i don't see any members of the task force awaiting recognition. >> very good. at this point, i think we're perhaps we should go to public comment. >> we can go to public comment. i should also note for everyone's information, that because the january 12th restricting task force agenda is posted on the website, and agenda item number 4 is a mapping and community of interest visualization item, that discussion of strategy and timeline for developing drafts could also happen there, because it's part of our agenda item for the 12th. mr. chair -- technology is checking to see if we have callers in the queue. we're working with matthew from the department of technology.

members of the public who wish to provide public comment on the mapping updates call (415)655-0001 and enter today's meeting i.d. press the pound symbol twice and press star followed by 3 if you wish to be entered into the queue to speak. for those interested members of the public who are connected to the meeting through the web ex tell meeting software, if you wish to speak indicate so by raising your hand with the webex meeting and we will add to you to the queue of speakers and for those already on hold in the queue, continue to wait until you are prompted to begin and you will hear a prompt that informs your light is unmuted and that is when you will will begin your comments. we have 15 listeners rit now and two callers in the queue. three callers in the queue. can we have the first caller, please. you have three minutes. >> caller: this is (inaudible) of san francisco.

it's time to get attention to share something before public comment and hopefully it's something i wanted to respond to but we wanted to recognize that the next few meetings, the next two or three meetings be kept as a single-district focus. you haven't done one of these meetings before. a lot is going to surprise you. i think especially because you are starting with district 6, which is brave to do, there's going to be a lot of lessons to learn and you are going to want to have time during these meetings to talk about those lessons and use them. also, whether these meetings are district focused or not, people are going to show up with feedback about their district. even if it's not the focus of the district. public comment that needs to be heard. and it's important because people may not be able to show

up for the meeting, you've scheduled for their district. they might be able to show for another meeting. so that's an important thing to keep in mind too. i'm still looking at pasta agaia for the task force. so you know, on march 2nd, the task force had a deadline for public to submit their maps. on march 29th. they had a deadline for the public to submit their supervisor district maps. so, not really sure how that all worked out. we have to dig into the agenda and meeting notes more but the meeting information is there on-line if you want to find that. there were draft notes for people to respond to that in december. there's a lot of catching up to do. it's been a hard time to do this work so, thank you for all your time to get it going. thank you.

>> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. could we have the next caller, please. >> caller: can you hear me ok? >> clerk: please, begin. >> caller: david pilllaw. nothing much to share this was a great update and i appreciate the thoughtful work of the cast of thousands hyped the scenes and i think the way you have discussed taking input by district and fussing with it, it's all good and i'm supportive. i'll leave it at that right now. >> clerk: next caller, please. >> caller: hi, i'm calling from sf rising. i just wanted to thank you all first for your work so far and to the mapping consultants for working to get the mapping tool up and also keep it updated based on everyone's feedback. i do want to urge the task forced to get some training on the calender for people to learn how to use these mapping tools.

at sf rising we've gotten questions about the tool and we are trying our best to field them and figure out the mapping tool ourself, but we would love is really for us to have some training so we can point and say, let's mobilize people to get to these so they can learn from start to finish, how to create a district or a coin map and we also want to encourage you to provide these trainings and other commonly spoken languages in the city at the very least, have translation services in spanish and chinese. so yeah, i do hope you are able to add something to the calender in the nexcom of meetings and so we can start training folks up on how to use these tools. >> clerk: thank you very much for sharing your comments. [please stand by]

>> clerk: thank you, mr. hooper for your comments. do we have any further callers

in the queue? >> there are no further callers in the queue. >> clerk: thank you. mr. chair, there are no further callers. >> chair townsend: thank you. public comment is closed and i don't think there's any action to be taken. >> clerk: mr. chair, there are now several members of the task force awaiting recognition before we move on. >> chair townsend: why don't we go to them before we file this. >> clerk: member ho has her name in the roster. >> chair townsend: member ho, please. >> member: thank you, chair townsend. i wanted to circle back to the conversation of when we should have our first draft maps. but, i do, you know, in line with the values of this panel being inclusive of all of the communities and that we are making it that each individual

district can have, you know, their own attention. i think it's important for us to first receive feedback and at least be at every district before we, you know, propose our first initial map. and that is the point of community input and i think it's a core value to i think all of us. so that's all. i just wanted to. i don't know when with all of these changes and cal kerr and all that stuff and because we haven't finalized the rest of the dates for the meetings. i would just encourage us to not start making maps until we hear from the whole city. that's all. thank you. >> chair townsend: thank you. >> clerk: mr. chair, i see member hernandez gil.

>> chair townsend: mr. hernandez gil. >> member: i just wanted to echo what some of the folks in public comment said around this training, the need for training. i have received some, not a lot, but a surprising number of requests around issues with the tool. it's challenging for people to wrap their head around some of the options, so i definitely do think that it is important for there to be a training and also for there to be somebody or someone who have technical needs. specifically, i've got a member of the public reached out to me and mentioned that they couldn't opening up the masks they made and it was just

blank. so i really want to make sure we're getting as much feedback about the maps. [mr. chair, i see member pierce in the roster. >> chair townsend: member pierce. >> member: i want to weigh in and thank you for the feedback from everybody in the public as well as my fellow members on all of this. i want to weigh in on, yes, we want to hear back from everybody before we start planning maps and like the chair and like member hernandez gill, i am hearing back from people as i'm walking down the street getting phone calls and texts and e-mails about people who are concerned with how this

process is rolling out and i think especially in certain districts i don't think it's necessary for us to shorten our kwej because i think that's going to cause a lot more problems for us down the road. i know we tabled this discussion until next week so i'm not going to get too far into it, but it does speak to the discussion that we're having right now and i agree that if we go even on districts that we are not going to make significant changes to, if we go and start creating maps without having heard from them, we're kind of sunk. but the creation of these calendars say two to four weeks and we don't have that kind of time to expand in order to redesign something that is already out there on the table. thank you, guys.

>> chair townsend: thank you. >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any further members on the roster, but mr. neil has some comments. >> thank you. thank you for the comments and i would just like to say that we are working on some training materials to go into more depth and also would encourage people to get in touch with our e-mail support in support of redistricting if you run into issues so we can help you through that as well. yeah. >> chair townsend: thank you so much and just before we close this off, i just want to make sure that the public understands, we want to get to the mapping and we wanted to get to it yesterday, but we can't do it until the right

kind of information and tools are in the public's hands. the public is asking for tools so they can work the resource site and they want training tools and we want all of that and we've got to get that to you and then we can get started on some effective map making. it takes time. we're here on behalf of the citizens of the city and county of san francisco and we're not here to meet just the needs of those who are deeply into computers and deeply into map making and one of the reasons i'm concerned about not having public means, i want to make sure that we deal with the lowest common denominator when it comes to understanding who can understand what we're doing. i want to be in public so we

can actually explain it to people who don't do computers. they have rights in this process as well. this process as well just because even though they may not be googled up. it still affects them and we have a responsibility to meet their needs as well as we meet everyone else. so i'm sorry it's going this slow, but i don't know a proper way to speed it up. and so we're going to keep plugging and we're going to get there and i can tell you, members, because of how we have to do it there are some late nights in our future. thank you very much, mr. carroll. >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any further names in the roster. would you like to move forward? >> chair townsend: yes, please. >> clerk: i can file this

discussion noting for the public that mapping update does appear on the january 12th agenda as well. agenda item number four is task, force member reports. this is a discussion item and we will be taking public comment from the task force member reports. call (415) 655-0001. enter the meeting id of 24802627041. then press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting. following that press star followed by the numeral three if you wish to be entered into the queue to speak. a system prompt will indicate you have raised your hand. please wait until the system indicates you have been unmuted and that will give you opportunity to provide your comments. for interested members through the webex telemeeting software, please indicate so by raising your hand. doing so will add your name to the queue of speakers awaiting recognition. mr. chair, the item is called.

>> chair townsend: thank you. members, are there any reports? are there any hands? >> clerk: mr. chair, they're coming in now. i'm seeing member chasel lee awaiting recognition. >> member: thank you, mr. dhar. i wish to report that i spoke with several community members in the tenderloin to discuss the up coming meeting on january 14th. that is all. >> chair townsend: thank you. >> clerk: i see member hernandez gil on the roster. >> chair townsend: memo hernandez gil. >> member: similarly, i have had a couple of conversations with a couple community groups in the tenderloin updating them around the districts -- i've

already communicated the concerns. i also had three conversations with the office of supervisor ronen just inquiring around what the status of the tasks force was on the brief updates and very brief conversation with supervisor safai just explaining and reiterating to not just them but the supervisors that it has been drafted and that we're still in the process. >> chair townsend: thank you sir. >> clerk: mr. chair, i'm seeing member jeremy lee in the roster. >> chair townsend: mr. jeremy lee, please. >> member: i just wanted to report that this week i along with member ho took a meeting with api council. they plan to put forward -- they're kind of putting together their own version of the district wide maps and a

point to submit that to the task force in the near future. >> chair townsend: thank you, sir. is there anyone else? >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any members of the task force awaiting recognition. >> chair townsend: thank you. then we can file this item and move to -- oh, public comment. >> clerk: that's right, mr. chair. >> chair townsend: yes. public comment on this item. >> clerk: reaching out now to the department of technology who is working with our queue of callers who wish to provide public comment on the reports. member os the public who are interested in providing public comment should call (415) 655-0001. today's meeting id is 24806267041. after you've entered the meeting i.d., press the pound symbol twice. for those interested members of the public who are connected to the meeting through the webex

telemeeting software, please raise your hand inside the system and await recognition. mr. chair, i see there are 15 callers listening to the meeting. are there any callers who wish to provide public comment on agenda item number four? >> chair townsend: bless their hearts. then we can file it on to the next item. >> clerk: if we could close public comment and then we can file the item. >> chair townsend: public comment is closed and now we can file the item. >> clerk: thank you. of i'll do so. noting for everyone's benefit, the task force member reports is presently a regular item on our agenda and will appear on future agendas as well. agenda item number five is city department representatives/public official reports. members of the public who wish

to provide public comment on this should call (415) 655-0001. enter the meeting id of 24806267041 followed by pound twice. if you're in webex, you can raise your hand and await recognition. mr. chair, this item is called. >> chair townsend: thank you. mr. carroll, do we have any city department representatives or public official representatives who want to make comment at this time? >> clerk: just delaying for a moment to see if anyone's going to add their name to the roster. mr. chair, i'm not seeing anyone awaiting recognition. >> chair townsend: thank you. is there public comment on this? i imagine so. >> clerk: let's take a look. checking now to see if we have callers in the queue. i will reiterate even though we've heard them numerous times in the last minute or so. interested members of the public call (415) 655-0001.

in enter the meeting id of 2486267041 followed by pound twice followed by star three to enter the queue to speak or raise your hand in the webex software if you wish to speak. do we have any callers on this item? mr. chair, there are no callers in the queue. >> chair townsend: thank you, public comment is closed. and we can move to the next item. >> clerk: i'll file this discussion as well, mr. chair. >> chair townsend: item number seven. >> clerk: number six, mr. chair. >> chair townsend: i thought that was six. >> clerk: if you wish to provide general public comment

for item six, general public comment, please raise your hand at this time. if you are a caller who has dialed (415) 655-0001 and you have entered the meeting id which is 24806267041 and then you've pressed the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting. if you wish to speak, dial star followed by three and that will add you to the queue of speakers. if you are connected to our meetings from within the webex client, if you wish to be added to the queue, raise your hand and await recognition. we still have 15 listeners and one caller in the queue. can you please connect us to our first caller for three minutes. >> caller: hi. this is lauren girardin from the league of women voters of san francisco again. i just wanted to circle back to what the chair was talking about before that came after public comment on this item. so i just wanted to say the

suggestion that you wait to have a draft map until you have met with each of the districts in these meetings. i'm looking at your calendar of meetings. the last district that you meet with is district 7 and you do not meet with district seven until march 14th. in the other districts twice before then, but not district 7. so if you're going to wait to have a draft map on these district specific meetings, it's suggested that you should relook at which districts you're meeting with and when so that you meet with all of them as soon as possible. otherwise, you are waiting to have to draw the map until after march 14th which will be less than one month before the final map is due. i do not believe that one month of feedback on the city by draft map will be enough time to produce a final map that you

can all agree on and that will work for the city. that would be really tough. that's the timeline. so it might be worth thinking that over again. so thank you. >> clerk: can we have the next caller, please. >> caller: my name is francisco de costa. and it's very important that in conducting all your meetings especially the action items that we have on our website. especially because of the pandemic, we need to access the documents and also the nature of what's happening in our

nation. we want a well-informed, educated knowing exactly what's happening in san francisco. and i've monitored and i've heard all of your deliberations, i'm monitoring them because i have a blog. what i want is the data has to be verified because we need the critical data to make the right decisions. we have been hoodwinked before in the redistricting we need

people whose hearts are in the right place. anybody can talk the talk. we need to have accountability and transparency and have all your action items on your website. thank you very much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments, mr. de costa. could we be connected to the next caller, please. >> caller: i assume you can hear me okay. david pillpell. once again, i find myself in agreement with lauren girardin. yes, as she said. if you wait until you've heard from all districts, then that would be mid march which would give you a month or so or probably less than a month if you take a few days after that to start adding meetings and moving lines and such so that

would take you to march 1st, but that would move it up by a week and a half and you may want to revisit the question of addressing more than one district at a meeting. i see, for example, the meeting set for district four we can take a lot of time talking about district four, but really there aren't a lot of ways to slice and dice district four. or we're going into the inner sunset to some but i haven't anyone suggest that four should include west portal or how we're going to connect to chinatown or hunter's point.

i'm not sure that an entire meeting just devoted to four is necessary. anyone can talk about at any district at any time and they're encouraged to do so. so there may be some value to addressing more than one district as part of the focus of any particular meeting. again, i agree with lauren girardin. thanks very much. >> clerk: thank you for sharing your comments. do we have any further callers in the queue? >> there are no further callers in the queue. >> clerk: mr. chair, there are no further callers for public comment. >> chair townsend: very good. are there any members who -- >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any members of the task force who wish to be recognized during general public comment. >> chair townsend: thank you. i would not think so. >> clerk: could we close public comment? >> chair townsend: please. >> clerk: public comment is

closed. and i can move us forward in our agenda, mr. chair. >> chair townsend: please do, sir. >> clerk: agenda item number seven is future agenda items. this is a discussion and possible action item and we will be taking public comment. members of the public who wish to provide public comment should call the public comment call-in number which is still (415) 655-0001. meeting id 24806267041 followed by pound twice. if you're connected by web ex, raise your hand in webexif you wish to speak on future agenda items. mr. chair, this item is called. >> chair townsend: members, what say you about future agenda items? >> clerk: delaying for a moment to see if any memos. mr. chair, i see member jeremy

lee. >> member: i would just like to at our next meeting, it can be, you know, kind of lumped in with the schedule updates that we do discuss and decide on a specific date that we have a draft map out for the public. just because, you know, having a draft map is really what's going to excite the public and get them interested and involved in redistricting and i think unless we have that, you know, the response may not be as robust unless we have that out first. thank you. >> chair townsend: very good. is there anyone else? >> clerk: mr. chair, i don't see any further members of the task force awaiting recognition. i should note that for the next agenda, this being the agenda that's published presently and available for public viewing right now for the january 12th meeting, the wednesday, january 12th meeting to be begin at 5:30, we have agenda

item number four appearing on that agenda. it is a mapping and visualization with a bullet that says strategy and time line for developing draft maps. it's already published there. >> chair townsend: we are covered there anyway. wonderful. and, mr. jeremy lee, i assume that will meet your need. >> member: yes. perfectly. >> chair townsend: perfect. is there anyone else? >> clerk: i'm not seeing any further members of the task force awaiting recognition, mr. chair. >> chair townsend: general public comment. >> clerk: this will be the last time we take public comment on today's agenda and it is public comment on future agenda items. member officer the public who wish to provide public comment on future agenda items should call (415) 655-0001. and then enter the meeting id which is 24806267041. press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting and star

followed by three if you wish to enter into the queue to speak. for those interested members of the public who are connected to the webex client, if you wish to speak and comment on the future agenda item, raise your hand within webex and await recognition. checking now to see if it we have any callers in the queue from among our 16 listeners. could you connect us to our first caller or let us know if we have no callers in the queue. >> there are currently no callers in the queue. >> clerk: mr. chair, there are now callers. >> chair townsend: very good. public comment is closed. and, mr. carroll. if you can file this item. >> clerk: certainly. >> chair townsend: and i believe that brings us to adjournment. >> clerk: that is correct, mr. chair. there is no further business before the task force. >> chair townsend: well then, the task force is adjourned.

thank you member. thank you, ms. mcdonald, and mr. seth neil for your presence: city attorney shannon and all those participating. all the clerk staff. we thank you all so much for serving us so well at every meeting. thank you have a great weekend and i will see you probably before i can turn around. i'm getting used to seeing all of you. >> clerk: the next meeting will be on wednesday, january 12th at 5:30. it will be hosted remotely as well. the agenda is posted. all the access information is there. >> chair townsend: look forward to seeing you all. have a great weekend. bless you.

♪♪ ? an incredible program because we take regular kids teach them the love of the game. we have no emphasis on winning we only have an emphasis on learning and trying as hard as they can that's it and the chips fall where they may. when students leave our program whether or not adults or kids they'll have a mechanical understanding of what they have. you don't have to be 7 feet tall

or be super faster but you do need skwil. once you teach kids how to have control over the tennis courts they'll master. please invest