mr. alonso? >> yes. >> mr. leigh? >> no. >> ms. lam? >> yes. >> ms mondejar? >> i thought this was about a non population moved. >> that is correct. you are tracking correctly. [laughter] >> so for now, i will say no. >> ok. mr. pilpel? >> no. i think this potentially affects the woods area, and we have heard some testimony on that. i hadn't and seven previous meetings to put all of this into five, and i explained before the road that is not there, so i am not with doing this at this time. i am sorry. >> thank you. mr. schrieber? >> no. >> i am actually leaning towards yes. i was trying to clarify, so i am actually going to say yes, based that this does not really encroach on the area. yes. >> excuse me. so it is -- -- >> can we just overlay public testimony? i think the council submitted boundaries. i am sorry. do you guys set boundaries for that amount? >> no, i do not think we do. >> and do we have the council met but they submitted in the entirety? >> i believe that we have one large, like one large layer for that

mr. alonso? in or out? >> out. mr. leigh? >> no. >> mr. manned harr? >> no. >> ms. tidwell. >> no. >> ok, next. >> on the recaptioning of the section, i would like toe change the caption because i think it is important to refer to the staff. >> ok, so the proposal is? >> task force composition officers and staff. >> you get that, ms. tidwell? >> uh-huh. >> any snokse moving then. anything else in section b? >> what i took from the last vote was not to include the dates. could we re-order it? just the three sentences so that they're in the order of the selections. that would be the election commission, the board of supervisors and the mayor. >> why? if there are no dates, no one will have an appreciation other than you. >> because that tracks with the later -- >> ok, we're not going to debate it. that's all. >> about the history. >> great. thank you. mr. alonso? >> out. >> mr. leigh? >> no. >> ms. mondejar. >> no. >> mr. schreiber? >> no. >> ms. tidwell? >> no. >> ok, next. >> and to be replace technical advice, i would replace that with technical assistance. >> whic

mr. alonso: yes. mr. leigh: yes. i have a question. should i ask my question? the question had to do with the description between neighborhoods and institutions. i think this refers to the lead. however the lead-in is phrased, as long as it is consistent with the content with what is indicated for each district. right now, it looks like it is a reference to neighborhoods. i think we need to reconcile that of it to include institutions. >> i encourage you to stick with the recognized neighborhoods language. the purpose of having the findings is to justify going above 1%, which you can only do for recognize neighborhoods. >> i understand that logic. i think there are a couple of important exceptions. i am fine with taking this general approach. with district 10 -- right now, it is listed in the consultants list as general hospital with a note. that would be problematic to just leave it that way. mr. mcdonnell: i will withdraw what i just proposed. let's go district by district. let's see if there any exclusions you would like to make. then we will answer them. di

mr. alonso: we did miss one thing for section 4. on district 9, we did put it north of the park in district 9. mr. mcdonnell: that is a point of fact. >> you're talking about district considerations. >> it is in the 11 write-up. are we putting them in twice? >> across all of them, we had -- >> my point is there is a bunch of redundancy. everything should show up in five. if it is stated once, the point is captured. are you satisfied -- >> it even says mclaren park south. it would make sense for the reader that mclaren park north would be included in the section. mr. mcdonnell: ok. sure. >> the web would resolve that is to put the text in the district where it ended up. that is just the way i would do it. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. we are resolved. ok. with that intro the city attorney just offered, what follows is -- how would you say it in court? >> exhibit a. mr. mcdonnell: recognized neighborhoods. that goes tehre as -- there as a replacement. the intro to those sections is correct. district 1 and the deviation. district to come a

mr. alonso? >> i am going to say no, because even though i live right there, i am going to say that i think two supervisors is more than adequate for the park. that should be fine. >> mr. mcdonnell? >> i say no for the same reasons. i am actually opposed to splitting the park at all. >> so we will not make this change. >> thank you. >> i thought the eastern side had more merit. thank you very much. >> thank you, sir. are there any other non population based? >> yes. i had, i was wondering if we could consider moving all of the uc campus into district 5 and keep it together. initially, i had suggested district 7, but it looks like more of district 5 once it, so i would propose doing that. >> could you please highlight that? >> it is, the borders are? drive, clarendon and up. all of the way to parnassus. >> do we know if there is student housing or graduate student housing? it is within a region highlighted? >> the population. >> in the highlighted area, there is a population of 405. would you like

mr. alonso: the press is out there, so we could just run out in the next five minutes? mr. mcdonnell: nice. we have one proposal on a press conference with less than a quorum, at a conference at event. mr. alonso: no. ms. lamms. leigh: yes. ms. mondejar: yes. mr. pilpel: yes. mr. schreiber: yes. ms. tidwell: yes. mr. mcdonnell: thank you so much. we will move forward with planning and event of some sort, less than a quorum, to be determined how and when. any public comment on the press conference item? thank you so much. thank you so much. item number 7, task force

mr. alonso: the press is out there, so we could just run out in the next five minutes? mr. mcdonnell: nice. we have one proposal on a press conference with less than a quorum, at a conference at event. mr. alonso: no. ms. lamms. leigh: yes.

mr. alonso: are we in agreement that we know where it exists? mr. mcdonnell: i believe so. mr. alonso: and i'm pretty sure it does not matter. mr. mcdonnell: mr. pilpel has proposed it. mr. pilpel: i would probably be ok with it as is. mr. mcdonnell: any objection to the insertion? ok. that includes district 6. only five more to go. >> this is long. mr. mcdonnell: district 7. so -- ms. tidwell: this gets to the consultants point that i listed out all of the neighborhoods and they just included them as listed in the [mumbling] boundaries. mr. mcdonnell: i am not sure what your point was. ms. tidwell: just explaining the difference. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. beginning with the consultants. let's go the other way around. any deletions? jamie? are there any of these that we should not list? >> i do not believe so. i think this is a great list. mr. mcdonnell: you think this is a great list? all in favor? all: aye. >> if they have submitted their boundaries, also a list of neighborhoods that are included in the central council, then i think this is representative of those neighborhood

mr. alonso: the press is out there, so we could just run out in the next five minutes? mr. mcdonnell: nice. we have one proposal on a press conference with less than a quorum, at a conference at event. mr. alonso: no. ms. lamms. leigh: yes. ms. mondejar: yes. mr. pilpel: yes. mr. schreiber: yes. ms. tidwell: yes. mr. mcdonnell: thank you so much. we will move forward with planning and event of some sort, less than a quorum, to be determined how and when. any public comment on the press conference item? thank you so much. item number 7, task force budget. ms. lam: there are no additional reporting, just a recap from the last budget. we are anticipating a net balance of " approximately $8800 related to the outreach and consultants. at minimum, we would have that balance if not more. mr. mcdonnell: any questions? mr. pilpel: consistent with the comment a while back, some funds existing, and consistent with the admen codes, could we arrange to. a small number of reports, in addition to having a pdf available on the website for download and printing? mr. mcdonnell: yes, thank yo

mr. alonso? >> i second that thought, yes. chairman mcdonnell: ok. that's it. for both the reasons that mrs. melara indicated, which is we made decisions with forethought in mind and with all considerations and the unfortunate reality as we have discussed throughout almost every one of our meetings is that no matter what decision we make, someone will disagree, and they will present a compelling case for changing it. unless we want to meet past april 14, i would suggest that unless there is a compelling case, a new compelling case with new information, then i would not be in favor of making these changes, to shift decisions we just made. it would be different if we hadn't just made these decisions with full task force deliberation. on 6-3, we will not do that. ms. tidwell, let's go to the st. luke. >> i need an upgrade. chairman mcdonnell: by that clock, we will take a break for ms. tidwell, and we will res chairman mcdonnell: we will resume now our mapping discussion. ms. tidwell, are you prepar

mr. alonso? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: ms. tidwell? >> i think i am going to say no. i don't see any public testimony around that being in sunny side. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mr. schreiber? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mrs. melara? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: ms. lam. >> i used to live at monterrey and juice, and i have for -- for several years, and i think i did have a closer -- the bordering neighborhood, but i am in in support of moving that border to monterrey. chairman mcdonnell: that was a yes? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: and mrs. mondejar? >> no, wipet support this. chairman mcdonnell: all right. so we would not make that change. >> did we look at russian hill? can we get the count there? the 2-3 border and see. chairman mcdonnell: let's go for a moment -- i am going to come back to this area in a moment. let's go to another area. >> i am not sure how the legal description works here to go from mansell to bayshore because they don't connect. there

mr. alonso? >> yes. >> mr. leigh? [reading names] >> i will say yes, but there is a population here, just because there is population there. to get it on record. >> get it on the record that there is population. [reading names] please make this change. and if i can make this so it is a sweeping curve? >> that is a population of six people. the mine is on bayshore. >> take that line out. >> that adds 20 people. >> really? well, if that really is east, if that really would put a mine at bayshore to the folks that there are folks on eastside of bay shore, they really ought to be there. >> that is one point of view. >> ok. >> would you like to hear the deviation? >> yes, please. >> both of these have a population of 26. the district 10 deviation would be -0.87%, and the deviation for district 9 would be 4.81%. >> thank you. ms. mondejar? just for the record, there are people there. we were supposed to do no population. >> i actually agree. i think we are doing a lot of things that we were not going to do, and i think we s

mr. alonso: yes. ms. melara: yes. ms. lam: yes. ms. mondejar: yes. mr. pilpel: yes. mr. schreiber: yes. ms. tidwell: yes. mr. mcdonnell: thank you so much. >> i just wanted to thank tidwell, melara, and leigh, and really, thank you for taking the time to pull all lavar reports together -- pull all of our reports together. mr. mcdonnell: thank you very much. it moving again, item number six. a press conference. based on lots of discussion and exploration with the city attorney around options, they are fairly limited in that while we do want to find a suitable, formal moment of issuing of the report, the problem is if we do it collectively, that it constitutes a meeting. once it constitutes a meeting, we are back where we started again. so our options are, a, we hold a press conference with less than a quorum present, which therefore does not constitute a meeting and we issue it, or to report its issued and a less public, less formal, less visible way and just gets distributed to committee and habitants. discussion? >> i have a suggestion. i suggest we hold a press conference with share m

mr. alonso. >> no. >> on the agenda. so i will make sure a state and gets into the draft. thank you. so the draft that is being worked on between now and friday, will it be possible, assuming there is a draft by close of business friday for that still to be posted and

mr. alonso. ok. mr. pilpel. >> back to where we are, in the block to the west as well. this is with me haight and inner sunset. the big rack. the children's playground carousel. the tennis courts. but there probably are a couple of other things, but, yes, they are a major feature. this is reasonable. a little odd to look at, but i am wondering if there is any population in this highlighted area. a at -- the deviation of district 5 would be 1.3%. it would be -4.99%. >> i so propose. >> thank you. mr. mr. leigh, mr. alonso. [reading names] who did i leave out? ok. ok, phase two, and i am not as supportive of this, but i am thinking about this on the west side, north of four. select certain blocks, so starting at 19th and lincoln /crossover. north of there. south o

mr. alonso. >> no. >> on the agenda. so i will make sure a state and gets into the draft. thank you. so the draft that is being worked on between now and friday, will it be possible, assuming there is a draft by close of business friday for that still to be posted and available for the public to review overnight friday prior to our meeting saturday? >> so, if i may, correct me if i am wrong -- posting as possible. we will post whatever version of the draft is ready to be posted. >> ok. can we, who knows what is going to happen saturday, but could we at least contemplate allowing the public sometime, maybe while we take a break so that if there are further tweaks made on saturday, either on the lines or on the report, that people have a chance to digest and comment? we're not making changes on the fly and that is that without an opportunity for public comment? that is kind of important. >> i will think about that. >> ok, thank. >> clarification. to go back to the districts, who are right -- are we writing the two parts, the deviation and also the neighborhoods that we decided to inclu

mr. alonso, no. chairman mcdonnell: are you prepared to have us look at some population data information? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: but go to the population data on north mission and 14th street, what ever is easier for you to get to. >> we do not have filipino population. what we do have is the major population groups that are reported in the senses. we have latino and asians but not sub groups such as the appeals -- filipinos or koreans or chinese within this group. >> we can look at the latino or asian trade we have surname matched -- we can look at the latino or asian. we have surname matched filipino. which one would like to see first? which population group? chairman mcdonnell: latino. >> as you can see this as percent latino population. the darker the color, the higher the population. this is the area around cayuga. cayuga is right here and you see the district boundary in black. chairman mcdonnell: i will start with you with any questions related to the data she sharing. >> this is the pres

mr. alonso. any final population tweaks ? commissioner alonso: no. commissioner leigh: no. commissioner melara: no. commissioner mondejar: no more. commissioner pilpel: i tried and tried and tried. >> did we want to hear about this? you said you would fight until the end. thank you, that was helpful. commissioner schreiber: we are good with where we are right now. >> with respect for deviation? >> and it may be helpful that that will not be kept under 5. >> 4.998%. >> thank you. >> the only thing i was looking at was that other we're border. >> close your eyes. just kidding. >> you go west of that. and there is a hill at the top about. >> give them direction, please. just to the left of the block. >> that is a population of 36 people. the deviation for district 7 would be -0.64%. the deviation for district 9 would be 9.4%. commissioner pilpel: no. commissioner mondejar: what is the rationale? >> you go on up and you cannot really go, it is more 7 in my geographic world. commissioner m-- commissioner mondejar: you are not affecting -- >> if anything, you are bringing more of

mr. alonso. ok. mr. pilpel. >> back to where we are, in the block to the west as well. this is with me haight and inner sunset.

mr. alonso. any final population tweaks ? commissioner alonso: no. commissioner leigh: no. commissioner melara: no. commissioner mondejar: no more. commissioner pilpel: i tried and tried and tried. >> did we want to hear about this? you said you would fight until the end. thank you, that was helpful. commissioner schreiber: we are good with where we are right now. >> with respect for deviation? >> and it may be helpful that that will not be kept under 5. >>

mr. alonso is that still your proposal? >> still my proposal. chairman mcdonnell: thank you so much. mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: mrs. melara? >> no. mrs. lam? >> yes. mrs. mondejar? >> no. >> mr. philip, >> no. >> mr. schreiber? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. so we will not make this challenge. mr. leigh? >> can i just make a point of information or add a point of information? the population of the north panhandle that i believe we were looking at in an effort to explore restoring was 2,855. chairman mcdonnell: that is correct. >> i believe that i cludes the three blocks in the northwest corner of that section that are currently in district one in the current lines, and i believe that the population -- i wrote down 361 or something in an earlier meeting. if we were to imagine those blocks remaining in district one, that would make the gap a bit smaller. chairman mcdonnell: ok. let's look at this. >> sorry, could you clarify that? >> in that same area, you see the stair steps just east of golden gate park? >> correct. >> if we could look at those three blocks. this is