in your part of the district, again, like i said, i'm wasting your time and my own. i see -- >> i absolutely appreciate that and i identify with that. hearing all of that representation where my race was being invoked was frustrating but i'm going to take us back to and i'm not going to have you reverse, reverse, reverse, let's start with this map, that is currently on the table as our starting point for tomorrow and i will reintroduce my motion that we take this map and work with it tomorrow. >> i second. >> oh, i'm sorry. let's vote. >> so --

>> mr. chair, before we get to that, i want to -- >> we already had -- [multiple voices] [laughter] >> what am i not doing? >> there's nothing you're not doing, mr. chair. we just need to take a step back and let me recount what i have been recording with the various motions and the way i understand them because there were several steps front and back. in order for us to work on the motion put on the table we need to resolve several of the interceding moves that have got us here. >> thank you, mr. carol. believe it or not, when i said let's vote, i knew you were going to do that first. >> i'm glad you trust me. the very first motion offered was moments ago rescinded and that

was to adopt the form of the map at the time the motion was offered and at that time it was a series of changes offered by chasel lee. and this was move to go d9. this was moving to district 8, mission street, north of i-280 to valencia so market -- moving mint east of guerrero and move to go district 5, fed drig to buena vista and along the panhandle toward golden gate park. this was to move to district 7 areas south of mariposa, i may have recorded that incorrectly. this is the most important part that i wanted to recap. it may have conflicted with my understanding of a later one. say it again.

>> you got to have -- >> i was going on get around to that because member castillon had an undo that came to that. it's a time that member pierce offered this motion that was what was there. >> i heard (indiscernible), so that threw me off. can you repeat that part? [laughter] >> district what? >> no, no. >> please repeat -- [multiple voices] >> at that time you were offering dog patch, south of mareposa into district 10. >> yes. >> that's what i'm trying to get an image for us at that time. and then we had two district three, market street in the financial district. and then we had two district 6 from market street at 8th street, north on, at that time it was jones. >> can we -- [multiple voices] >> while you're reading that. >> i don't know if jaime is able

to back us up that far. >> don't back us up but i want to see where we are while you're talking. keep going. >> so, them pierce offered that motion and that was where we were at. and the image at that time was to adopt that map at that time and then put it forward for the consideration at tomorrow as meeting during live line drawing that was recently rescinded. after that map, i'm sorry, after that motion there was a motion from member cooper to make adjustment to the four d map which doesn't impact with the most recently offered motion. second to that, we received a motion offered by member castillon and second by member ho that made contradictory change to what was previously stated and this was dog creek to lake in district six. so, i go over that to make

sure we're reconciling this is, those things have an empact -- they have an impact in the way they were ordered so if you're going to have a motion to adopt the current map as it is shown on this screen right here, it would be sensible to just rescind the motion for the creek change because that's reflected in this map here and it was a change necessary based on the -- not offered by motion, changes that were proposed from member chasel lee and a complicated way to stay that this is probably the cleanest way for us to consider the motion that was just offered. >> yes. i'll rescind that motion so we can adopt member pierce's motion. >> thank you. >> so, then what that looks like is there's a motion that makes

changes proposed for the four d map, which we can deal with as the two objects separate from each other and there's a motion offered by motion pierce and seconded by motion ho to adopt changes made by consensus by this body to the four b map as it appears on your image and moving that document further for live line drawing for tomorrow. >> thank you. >> does everyone got it? >> is there questions with it? okay. so, mr. chair, which of the motions would you like to take first? >> i didn't hear you. >> which two motions would you like to take first? the motion offered by cooper was offered before this recent motion. >> seconded. >> yours has not been seconded. it's a good point. >> i second member cooper's motion. >> i didn't -- i want a clarification. what is his --

>> do you want me to restate it? >> so my understanding was to make an adjustment to the four d map that establishes a district three western border to bring russian hill into district two. the western border would be van ness, union, jones, columbus, 11 worth to the water. >> i can clarify procedurally, i think it would not, if the motion for -- i think we should take the motion for the current map first and i think if that one passes, the other map would still -- we would still draw it with five a. we would draw this map because that's what this motion says but we would make the changes to four, what was that, four da and make that a 5b that we would have in our back pocket. >> so, you're saying take this motion first? >> right. >> that's what i said. if y'all

trust me, we would be further along. >> mr. chair, it's not a matter of not trusting you but making sure we have the same understanding of the order of operations for the things we need to take. >> to member cooper's point, what we are voting on will be known in future as map five a, if it passes. what's on the screen as well. >> and now, is there anything that constrains -- oh, i see. >> my apologies. i thought we were going to be here far longer so i have been biting my tongue so i wanted to make the western addition whole as napa and it has opinion up said -- it has been upsetting me and boths bother me and it makes sense.

>> i'll accept that amendment considering we're going to be discussing and debating tomorrow, so i'm fine with that as long as there are no other corrections. >> let me just say that i don't like it. you've dunaway -- for me to oppose it, i would have to reject the whole map. and i don't mind the map itself, but i really -- >> can you please bring forward the maps that all the members can see it, there we go, thank you. >> member hernandez gil, this is

the coy definition from the north handle of -- is this the definition you would like to use between (indiscernible). >> no, i meant the -- i said neighborhoods definition so stretching it all the way out to the park. >> so the panhandle neighborhood boundary? >> that's right and the western addition right above that between fulton and turk. >> thank you. >> while jaime is showing that on the screen, from my understanding, is that being offered as a friendly amendment to the motion that was offered

by member pierce to -- >> i do accept, i don't know how friendly, but yes. >> thank you. >> friendly.... >> this just takes us from being completely compliant throughout the entire map to 15% in d5 and negative 7% in d1. i reject that. i mean, that's, like, i thought that we were trying to walk away with something we could work with. this is unworkable. >> what do you suggest? >> go back to -- >> move to where we were?

>> are you -- >> no, for me, this is a working map. right. no more broken than the one we started out with yesterday. no! >> the option, one of the options is to approve it and then tomorrow, work with the numbers and where they need to be or we can stay here and look at each other. >> um.... >> member castillon. >> i have heard from members of the public that they were super confused about the state of the map we left them with last night with negative 18, plus 18 change situation where they had no idea, like, what to think about what we were doing and i think

it's incredibly important that we present maps that could be legally adopted, so that they can give us actually tactical feedback on the map, so i do think it is worth exploring adding the panhandle to district 5. i think that is a totally valid thing to look at, but i really strongly believe we is this be having draft maps that's population compliant. >> one of the things that you said on that night when we voted owe >> right into the mic, we're not hearing you. >> now, y >> now, we're not. >> okay. one of things -- i'm trying to look at the poor man, the night that we voted at 3:00,

it's the optics were going to be bad and you were right. even though what we did was right. we had -- because it was 3:00 in the morning, people thought we snuck it. i have a similar feeling about this. i would really recommend we go back, keep the map the way it was and you can do this as soon as we come in tomorrow. but i think it would be great to leave it. it's a map that looks like it's balanced instead of in progress, so i recommend you do that. >> i want to keep it like that. >> it's staying so we can take a vote and everybody can vote this down, okay. let's do that. let's do this. >> mr. chair. >> so, i will make a motion to

have a vote with this configuration without the panhandle in district 5. >> we got a motion on the floor. >> we can have multiple motions at the same time, right? >> yes. >> yes. >> but -- [multiple voices] >> you didn't hear what you said. [multiple voices] >> if we're going to have a vote on this, then i will make a motion that we, that we advance the map that removes the panhandle for district 5 from this configuration. undoes the change that we had just done rather. >> i'll second that. >> okay. so.... mr. clerk, i need help. [laughter]

>> mr. chair -- >> hope is -- help is coming. >> what do we do? that's what i do. >> it's a good idea to just begin calling some votes on things so we have the land established and it's not the cascading series of questions that are unresolved. so, which -- would you like to deal with the -- the motion offered by member cooper that deals with a separate map? because it was offered first or would you like to deal with the map, the motion that pertains to the map on the screen right now? >> how would you like -- >> they're not in conflict of each other. >> i would like to deal with any of them, but why don't we do that, what you suggested. >> okay. because these came in in this order. it's a good starting point, so a motion

offered by member cooper, seconded by member pierce to make adjustments to the d4 map that -- d4a. ah, you're absolutely right. i wrote it correctly and read it backwards. offered by member cooper and seconded by member pierce to make adjustments to the four da map establishes a russian border of district 3 that follows the lines of van ness, union, jones, 11 worth, the worth. on that motion -- van ness, union, jones, columbus, 11 worth, water, i'm tired. thank you for correcting me. on that motion, member pierce. >> aye. >> pierce, aye. >> vice-chair reiner. >> no. >> reiner, no.

>> member castillon. >> no. >> castillon, no. >> member cooper >> aye. >> keeper, aye. >> member hernandez gil. >> aye >> ho >> no. >> member chasel lee? >> member lee. >> aye. >> chasel lee. >> aye. >> jeremy lee. >> aye. >> chair townsend. >> no. >> chair townsend, no. >> mr. chair, there are fivys and four no with chair reiner, member ho and transcend in the descend. >> motion passes. >> motion passes. >> no, the next motion was to accept the current map and it had a, that is the map four b. >> a >> four ba with friendly

amendment offered by member hernandez gil to include on that changes to include in district five, western addition and pan handle defined by one of the coy i did not write down. this was offered by member pierce and seconded by member ho on this motion. member pierce. >> aye. >> vice-chair reiner. >> aye. >> member castillon. >> to clarify, we're voting on the current map presented on the screen? >> that is what i stated, yes. >> no. >> no. >> wait! >> castillon was the vote, i'm taking on this. order for today is pierce, reiner, castillon, hernandez, chasel lee. >> we're in the middle of a vote and if we have to rescind the vote, we'll do that when we get there, we don't want to give

clarifying motion. >> cooper. >> no. >> hernandez gil. >> aye. >> member ho. >> no. >> member chasel lee. >> no. >> jeremy. >> aye. >> townsend. >> no. >> there's fouries and five nos with member castillon, member cooper, member ho, member chasel lee and townsend in descend. >> now, that motion fails, mr. chair. you want to bang the gavel. there were questions that came in while i was stating -- while i was taking the roll on that one, do you need for me to restate the motion you took the vote on? >> i think we understood. >> it's okay. we're fine. >> okay. >> now the next motion offered was to undo a portion of what was on the motion that just

happened a second agency. is that motion still offered by the mover? >> yes. >> so, this is to accept the map as it is on the screen right now which has had the addition of the western addition and the panhandle to district 5 removed from it. is everyone clear on that? >> did you stay moved. >> moved by chasel and seconded by yourself. >> i wanted to hear you right? >> yes. >> so i understand, this is the map that is moved for consideration at tomorrow's line drawing discussion. >> very good. >> before i start taking votes, do we have further questions about the operation of that vote? >> question, no questions. >> calling to question to accept map as it appears on your screen and moving it forward and offered by member castillon and seconded by vice-chair reiner. member pierce. >> aye. >> vice-chair reiner.

>> aye. >> member castillon. >> aye. >> member cooper. >> aye. >> member hernandez gil >> no. >> member ho. >> aye. >> member chase dl lee. >> aye. >> member jeremy lee. >> aye. >> chair townsend. >> aye. >> townsend aye. mr. chair, there are eight ayes and one no with member hernandez gil in the decent. >> motion passes. >> next. >> mr. chair, i don't see any other names in the roster but you may want to delay for a second. >> i had trouble hearing that. >> mr. chair, i'm not seeing names on the roster. >> okay, very good. are we through general public comment yet? >> if you want to do general public comment, we can go there.

>> please. >> okay. >> i forgot about that. [laughter] >> pardon me while adjust my (indiscernible). can we get the chair back in here. [multiple voices] >> my clarifying question is if 5b is one of the starting points for tomorrow as any should make those changes offline and then have that loaded into the map to

start mapping with or if those changes will be made live? >> if i could respond. i think we should have, you should make the changes offline. i think the motion was to start 5a tomorrow so i think that's what we'll start with. 5b should be brought into existence, thanks. >> my question was about 5b, which is changing the lines that are currently map 4b to the russian hill and if i should make those changes offline and that's the starting point for that map, map 5b tomorrow? >> yes. >> yeah. it will give a starting point but to be clear, we'll start with 5a. >> yeah. right. >> but yes, you should make the changes and create -- the db

thing is confusing me, but i don't want to do 5d without there being a d and c. >> so, what? [laughter] [multiple voices] >> don't do that. don't do that. >> jaime. [multiple voices] >> the map on screen currently will become 5a. >> yes. >> the map that's being built off of member cooper's motion that passed will be map 5b and i will make those changes offline for consideration tomorrow? >> correct, yes. yes. thank you. thank you, jaime. >> before we vote -- before we start public comment, anybody parked in the garage? it locks up at midnight. >> oh, my goodness. never mind. >> okay. >> wonderful.

>> so, that being resolved now, mr. chair, we're going to go to general public comment which is the only item on today's agenda. and this is it the opportunity for members of the public to speak generally on matters that's within the subject matter of the jurisdiction task force not on today's agenda. people in the room with us, in room 408 will get to speak first, but i'm going to give the access instructions for those who want to participate remotely. if you want to give your comments remotely, you should dial 415-655-0001 and enter the meeting i.d. for today's meeting which is 24848301358. press the pound symbol twice to connect to the meeting discussion. when you're connected, you'll hear the meeting discussions but your telephone line will be muted and you'll need to press star three to enter the speaker line. for

those on hold in the queue, please continue to wait until you hear the system indicate to you that you have been unmuted. and that will be your signal to begin your comments. or if you're connected to the meeting using the webex software, indicate you would like to speak by raising your hand in the system and when you hear two rapid beeps, it will go beep, beep, that means your microphone has been unmuted. and we have a few people in the room. can we get public comment from the first speaker, please. hang on a moment. where did he go? >> hello, everybody. my name is it jaime. i know we're super tired and going into the add -- public comment is becoming

(indiscernible) and i'm concerned about that. you know, we're hearing people calling in, you know, calling out, supervisors, the optic of that is very disturbing. so, you know, this is more for the public more than from this task force and it's like -- that to me makes this -- the people that's going to be harmed for the next ten years so that's number one. number two, i just want to express my thanks to everybody here, especially for the staff, you know, keeping things running even the folks outside cleaning the hallways and we forgot about those folks, too. and the high-tech people making things work and i want to express my gratitude. and i'm going to miss opening day tomorrow, and i want to say go giants, thank you. >> we are -- >> thank you for sharing your

comments with the task force. could we get next speaker, please. >> very good. perhaps kirk bradford is coming up to the microphone while we deal with the background technical issue. >> hello. yeah. i'm tired, too. last night was late. i'm actually a little relieved we're finishing earlier tonight. i'm in agreement with the last speaker, go giants and i'm also really disoccur anned we're going to miss opening night -- discouraged we're going to miss opening night because i was planning ongoing. i don't know what to say. you know, i heard a lot of really concerning comments coming from the public today and one thing that i do want to say is i think a lot of the callers can approve my point, which is that if you're

hearing a lot of callers of affluence and privilege calling you all all day long to tell you congratulations, you're doing a great job, thank you for protecting my district and my neighborhood, then you're hearing on the other side, a bunch callers, people of color and low-income folks and calling you and telling you, why are you doing this and breaking a part my community? that should tell you pretty clearly that you're headed down the wrong path, historically, morally and perhaps even legally. the reason i say that is, the people that you're giving congratulations and telling you great job that you're protecting are the very people who have stopped affordable housing in their neighborhoods and done everything they could to stop development in the western neighborhood and they're the most affluent privileged and safe people and you're doing it at the expense of the vulnerable

and they're saying thank you for protecting my white privilege and people they consider radical, i guess, poor people, people of color, lgbtq folks and special interest. thank you. >> thank you for sharing your comments, curtis bradford. could we have the next speaker, please and i'm going to share a slide that i just moments ago received from the speaker, so sf dot gov tv, so if you can display and i'll start the speaker's time. >> i apologize for the size of the drawing and i have been sitting here for the past -- for three hours and i had to restart the tool to make this map three times to get the districts right, so that's one of the challenges that i've had to try to give you the content you need to do the work you need to do. i

have the district of option that has the tenderloin south of market and it respects the boundaries of the lgbtq cultural districts and i appreciate the queer folks on this channel announcing that. i'm gay. and i think that you have to acknowledge when you're in a position of the world you're in, you have to be out. it's, there's no really choice so i understand the unconformability you have in your community -- unconformability you have, but you recommend your community. i have a district 5 that likes like the western map and the redevelopment area that created the western addition in this shape and form and those off golden gate park, but like the task you're asked to do is still possible with respecting the boundaries of these districts that have been around for 20

years, so i'm asking that we don't have to limit ourselves to the line drawing that you're doing on one map. we can actually can continue making more maps and he encourage you to continue playing with -- i encourage you to continue play with the tools, but i have an option for d6 and i hope you consider it. it's important that the tenderloin is stay -- staying united and the african american communities stay united and the african american in d11 stay together. i hope you understand that as african american. >> thank you for sharing your comments and i'm going to dismiss the slide so i can figure out how to do that. there we go. do we have anyone else here in room 408 who wants to speak to general public comment. if not, we can go to our folks connected remotely. next remote

speaker, please. >> greetings, this is david elliot lewis again, long time resident. you know, there's been a lot of hammering and consternation that residents as the elections commission and for them to rule on their three appointments to your task force and a lot of people are upset but there's a good reason they made that ask because they're -- because you're not sfonlding and listening to community. i don't know if it can be removed and that's not the point of this public comment but in listening to your discussion, you haven't brought up the community unity map for serious looks and the hours and hours i have attended, i haven't seen that map brought up once and if you did bring it up, maybe it was one of the few minutes that i wasn't watching. communities of interest, coy.

you know, i've heard your map, staff people say could we show that to you and you have only brought up coy, community of interest for seconds at a time. you haven't spent time look being at that and you haven't respected so many people in the community that asked you to keep the tenderloin whole and keep it connected to the south of market and district 6. you've ignored those voices. and because of that, and because of how the elections commission appointees are voting often with the mayor's office or mayor's appointees, that's why you're going to go before them on sunday for reconsideration. you can reverse it and i think put this issue to bed by just listening to the public and respecting their views. you haven't fully done that. you have given lip service and haven't done that. this is david elliot lewis, long-term tenderloin resident. thank you

for your time and consideration. please listen to us. that's all: >> thank you, david elliot for sharing your comment was the task force. next speaker, please. >> is there a caller on the line ready to give their comments and general public comment? perhaps it is an unattended line. we can come back around to it. can we have the next speaker. >> hi, can you hear me? >> yes. >> can you hear me? >> yes, we can. >> hi. i wanted to follow up, we know the election commission meeting is coming up. someone said it was the first sunday, that's incorrect. we know it's -- it's tomorrow. and it's going to be a conflict with the redistricting committee. we ask they put together a statement. i took the time to look up the

"brown act" around that. the "brown act" chapter 9 section 54954.22 says not subdivision a, the ledge have a tifb body, that's you, may take items not appearing on the posted agenda on the conditions below prior to discussing items pursuant to subdivision, the legislative body should publicly identify the item. upon its determination by a 2/3 vote of the legislative body -- unanimous vote of those members present that there's a need to take immediate action and a need of action came to a local agency subsequent to the agenda being posted. it's obvious that -- there are -- there are some powerful in this city and they're making this a part of an issue. it's important for this task force to get your statements on the

record before the commission meeting tomorrow and that's something you can do tonight by voting to add an item to the agenda. this is fully within the brown act. especially because the election commission moved that meeting from a 72-hour to barely a 24-hour notice without any announcement. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. can we get the next speaker, please. is there a caller on the line? >> good evening. steven from district 11. i just wanted to say i got to the meeting later on tomorrow due to choir practice, but listening to all the conversations and all the discussions about the different maps and the different neighborhoods, i'm almost glad

that district 11 is almost as intact as we want it to be. but i did want to present something to, as the first speaker mentioned, i've been on a lot of e-mails and recipients of a lot of e-mails and nasty e-mails about what this task force is doing or not doing and i find it -- not only do it find i (indiscernible), i find it demoralizing and i think that what this task force is needed to do was to adjust what we have been going through especially in the middle of the city, district 6, to decree in moving districts around, so i really feel for the task members. i feel the pain

you're going through. i know in my neighborhood, we had a few changes but it's not as bad as other neighborhoods so i want it thank you so much for everything that you're doing and i sure hope that you can approve this whole by the 15th of april, thank you. >> thank you for sharing your comments. can we get next speaker, please. is there a caller on the line? we're un-muting this line. you can bring them into the meeting to give general public comment. >> hello. >> yes, please begin. >> okay. thank you. this is teresa and i was watching as you were working on district 3 and i have never signed onto any of

the other letters because, in terms of holding russian hill also together because i knew this was an iteration process and i also knew that we needed to add some of d6 into d3 and i didn't want to be help to a letter that didn't really reflect what i believed was needed and was going to happen. i do know that many people who live between haight and columbus still refer to their homes there as being in north beach because traditionally, that was true. to those who have lived there for 70 years who were born there, also on fillburg and the corner of jones or levenworth so when i

talk about north beach, i'm sorry, but that's in my view that is still north beach as well -- not specifically saying fishermans wharf, that's part of north beach and that's my mistake in not making that clear to you, but i do support keeping our, you know, i'm talking about fisherman's wharf through china town and going onto include whatever we need to include in terms of selma, so just want to say that. thank you so much. >> thank you, teresa flander for sharing your comments with the task force. can we get the next speaker, please. oh, maybe many unattended lines. we'll try to come back around to them and

bring them into the meeting. just a reminder, if you heard your line has been unmuted -- >> hello. >> yeah. >> i think -- i just heard the note now. >> okay. >> i didn't realize there was public comment tonight, so bare with me, my notes are disorganized and i wasn't prepared as i like to be. my name is eleanor cox and i live in the inner sunset and i have called in a couple of times and i found the discussion tonight interesting and it felt like it came from a place that was responsive to the comments, so i wanted to start with the short thank you in that. he -- i found the census data of chinese speakers interesting and i'm digs disappointed -- i'm disappointed that didn't extend to the westside of the city

which is my neighborhood, the inner sunset and the maps together together in district 7 -- i would like to see some discussion among the task force moving us into district 4. maybe not the whole inner sunset but part of it. and one of my favorite moments tonight was when the members brought up a fair and effective representation and what that means for one person and one vote and how we have to address wealth as a factor in that decision or that process. and i just think there's so much historical and social economic connections between the inner and outer sunset but i feel like it hasn't been discussed with the same level of thoughtfulness that some other parts have been discussed like russian hill. i would like to see line drawing to move parts of sunset to -- and back into d7 because the numbers allow flexibility there

and i have not seen it discussed to the level that i would like. and you know, i think that's it. oh, did i want to emphasize that there's been a lot of discussion about how people want to see change but we're requesting. we -- >> thank you, eleanor cox for sharing your comments with the task force. sorry to cut you off now that we have reached the two-minute limit with your comments. can we hear from the next speaker, please. >> good evening, task force members, it is jared from the dog patch neighborhood. i want to thank you and i didn't do it in my comments this evening, each and every one for the tremendous mental work and effort you're doing. this job is not easy much it is extraordinarily thankful, someone is always going to be unhappy in this process and we hope that you organize your

thinking around keeping neighborhoods intact, keeping neighborhood clusters intact and keeping existing districts and affinity groups intact. and unfortunately, we're not there yet. we have a division between dog patch at the trail hill, that is a community of interest that is over 100 years old and that's something that needs to be remedied as we continue to do line drawing tomorrow. i'll note that the dog patch and northwest potrero don't show up in the district map. i saw a conversation in the agenda and given the same benefit as -- it hasn't shown up in the mapping yet. i think we're missing that thread. that thread where potrero hill people but dog

patch people show up in plenty of and maybe there's other groups that show up but we show up in other groups and we talked about the existing district 10 but we need to keep that as we go on because we're the people in the neighborhoods and we move back and forth under 280 that have cross contamination between our neighborhood groups. it's the potrero's dog patch association for crying out of loud. it tells the story and thank you for your efforts and there's a lot to balance and i repeat this because i know -- >> your time is conclude. thank you for sharing your comments with the task force. next speaker, please. >> hi, this is gloria berry. some points i wanted to make is i just want to reiterate what has already been heard before.

specifically, the (indiscernible) itself was very, very difficult to navigate -- the tool was difficult to navigate and i want to give a shout-out to william walker and he's good at making maps and he did find it easy, so a lot of us in community wanted to draw maps ourselves and when we saw the community map, a lot of us -- it appealed to us and that's why we didn't submit the original ones so i wanted to point out the community meeting with the black people and the former legislative aide of the former supervisor who lost an election in d5 put out that all four of us in support of the community map were being influenced by white people and i think that narrative is horrible. that person organizing people to come

this saturday to say that and it's sad that she's not aware of how many black people who came last saturday really feel the community map represents what we want to say. and also, if you can move the chase sebtser into d10. that would be nice. d6 needs two stadium and -- when it was torn down it hurt d10. i yield my time. >> thank you gloria barry for sharing your comments with the task force. can we get the next speaker, please. >> good evening, task force members. my name is eric. i'm (indiscernible) district. i do want to thank you guys for holding the line on guerrero street from the 24th to (indiscernible). it's very important for the latinx

community to (indiscernible) and we lost 11,000 latinx from the year 2000 to the year 2020 and there's a lot of latinx community that live as long valencia and the housing development on valencia street. it keeps valencia whole so we benefit. also one thing to remember is that the lgbtq community is spread out throughout this city through similar communities in the tenderloin. it had a woman's bar and so that there were a few latinx bars, gay bars along 16th

street and they welcomed them into castro and there's a history there that's unique in the valencia corridor with the lgbtq community that we celebrate. it belongs -- they welcomed the community there and it's used as part of our culture and valencia street has schools that are aligned all along valencia street along the tree basins and ties it to the (indiscernible) and it's tied into the latinx community and the intermission. >> thank you if you sharing your comments with the task force. sorry it cut you off. we have to move onto the next speaker. can we get the next speaker, please. >> good evening, task force members and i admire your stamina. it's amazing. this is

richard and i'm a member of north beach neighborhoods and russian hill neighbors and almost 40-year resident of district 3. as you guys well know better than i do that what you're trying to do is balance districts that are under populated with those that are overpopulated. d3 is the least populated district in the -- 11 districts and they need 1,071 more peep. it seems silly or a greshs to cutaway away russian hill and you should add to it and we would welcome the 7,000 new people to be in the statement district with us. so, i think rear than carving up russian hill and making it to accommodate other people who would be welcomed in russian

hill, but not at the extent of getting rid of people who always -- who are already here. i think it would be the most radical change to an electorate and expand it in a different direction. it seems unfair and inappropriate and county productive whereas starting with the boundaries that ex evident knowing that you have to add -- that exist and knowing you have to add seven thousand people and expand that district. why cut it up and reshift it? and you have my complete sense of faith in the task ahead of you but keep in mind that that loss fee. if it's an underpopulated district and thinking how it can be expanded without cutting away which makes it more necessary. >> your time is concluded. can

we get the next speaker. sorry to cut you off. you did reach your two-limit. >> john, if you'll excuse me for chair, you have to get to the garage before it closes. >> thank you, madam clerk. we have -- >> i think member hernandez gil left. i got the garage on dinner break. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> can we get next speaker, please. >> is there a caller on -- caller on the line? >> can you hear me? >> yeah. >> there's been a lot of claim about how this commission behaved that can be demoralizing. your response has

been unnotable and the awareness you have in the district comes through even if it's not displayed on the map. i would say that the maps you did tonight, i find 5a to be compelling relatively although they have compromises. and i think the commission should seriously consider (indiscernible) that are going to have most of our future population growth. thank you. >> thank you for sharing your comments with the task force. can we get next speaker, please. >> my name is crawford and resident of d5. i work in d6 and lived in the past in d6. i find it really troubling how the

so-called emerging communities, what seems like -- like privileged over this whole process. i look at the map you have now, and there's a huge block and somehow this newer community, the transit community and a community that would be appalled that you're breaking up so many other communities around the city, why did -- why do they get to all of a sudden be this huge block that can't be divided? it's causing ripples across this whole city. i just don't understand why that's the case. and the tenderloin and selma has deep connections with many of these corporations, preemption from the across the

city to get train asking they're pipelined into these corporations and their is -- these are the same districts that create this voice, so once you rip the tenderloin out of d6 and separate from selma, it's breaking this pipeline that creates communities all over the city. finally, california -- owe 17 and 19 cut the neighborhood in half and you're proposing to cut western addition in half? this is, like, utter renewal all over again. >> thank you for your sharing your comments with the task force. could we get the next speaker, please. >> hi there. i just want to just

to encourage the task force to think ahead ten years and listen to the words of mike chin talking about how housing policy has put us in the situation we're in now and that under waiting districts that started out leads to the same problem back around. i hope you consider that going forward and ideally, (indiscernible) so the lack of housing being built there doesn't further disenfranchise people on the you side. thank you for this work. this is thankless work that you're doing and many people appreciate all the time and energy you're putting in, so thank you all for your service to our city and good luck with the rest of it.

>> thank you speaker for sharing your comments with the task force. next speaker. >> i'm actually in district 1. it's interesting what the caller said about district 3. why isn't it expanding into district 2? district 2 and district 3 don't have a lot of new development. why is it always concentrated in district 5? which is over developed. or district 6 which is over developed. we're curious and i guess the great example, it's cut out of district 5 and not even put in district 6 so it's like you're giving all of this to district 2 that's never going to build anything, grow anything. they have to keep it stable for themselves, so i think that's why you keep

hearing, you know, the issueue business commission meeting on march 29, 2022. the meeting is called to order at 4. . 30 p.m. held in person in seventy-three city hall and broadcast live on sfgov and available to listening calling. mayor 45th supplement to her february 25. emergency on proclamation some members may attend remote. in this event the members will participate. the small be business mission