>> no. >> mr. leigh? >> for the same reasons that -- and chronology that vice-chair lam described, i will also vote no. >> mr. alanso? >> this is too many people too late. i'm sorry, no. >> thank you. >> ok. moving then down our list. mission bay, someone place mission bay. >> decided not to. >> thank you. don't worry about it.let's go 1. >> could you describe that? >> i could not. >> what we heard is that we are ready to kick between san jose, cabrera, and coconut and moved that into 8. the request is to keep that as is. i will keep some of the other blocks east of tiffany. it is bounded by guerrero, san jose and duncan. if there was an interest in the broader move of that area into 8, it would be the broader rotation that i saw the other day. this is already in 8. >> we are good on 3919. moving down to the potential block of sunnyside, the overlapping block of sunnyside and glen park. >> what are the streets that this block is bounded by? >> mangel and congo. >> that is correct. >> is that the correct bl

. >> mr. leigh? >> anything else before we go back to the top. >> with the report as a general top snick >> yes, please. >> the only other question that i have just a couple of logistical issues but i just wanted to make sure somebody had been thinking about how to pull all of this together. so first of all the appendsies that are referenced, as the map themselves and draft map thmselves and that submitted by the public, public community, community newspaper, advertisement, don't believe member melara nor i have made any attempt to compile or gather those materials. so just being conscious of our deadline, that's the question i would raise. >> sure. madam clerk? >> ok. i'm finally getting there. i can't talk anymore. the working draft map i can supply copies of that. the map submitted by the public, city wide map, we can -- i can work with and make sure i get the right ones attached. public comment, i'm not really clear on what you would want covered. >> the documents from from my point of view, the

mr. leigh: i am going to say yes. on the whole, i think it is fine. i appreciate member pilpel's attempts to respond to the issues we had. ms. tidwell: no. mr. mcdonnell: ok. it will remain in the individual section. ok. at the break on this section, mrs. mondejar will edit and give to ms. tidwell. the addition will be at tit -- added to lessons learned and recommendations. ms. tidwell: clarification. where do we want -- we want to include this at the end of the current submissions so we have lessons learned from the task force as part 6 and 7 as individual recommendations? ok. >> i was motioning to her that i have this in a separate document. i can do cutting and pasting for suggestions as to how we can blend the two. mr. mcdonnell: ok. very good. was there anything else that you needed for -- the district considerations? ms. tidwell: just a district 7. mr. mcdonnell: ok. all right. that takes us to section 5. and the -- yes? >> can i propose some introductory language for the very beginning, to make clear what the findings are? i would propose someth

mr. leigh: yes. ms. melara: yes. ms. mondejar: yes. ms. lam: yes. mr. pilpel: no. mr. schreiber: yes. ms. tidwell: yes. sure. do i leave it in the paris laugh -- paragraph form? mr. mcdonnell: be consistent and line it up. ok. moving into district 3. ms. tidwell: i am just cutting and pasting the consultants on the bottom. mr. mcdonnell: yes. in district 1, we did not use consultant. mr. pilpel: couple of things i am confused about now. if we are using the consultant language, i think this is two words. i do not know about keeping the parentheticals, and we receive somewhat different testimony about russian hill. i'm not sure we are saying we kept it together in district 2. ms. tidwell: that was part of my note-jotting-down. i was quickly taking notes when i put neighborhoods into a district. russian hill came from a prior notes, which was rejected. mr. pilpel: ok. >> for district 3, that is the publicly-submitted boundary for the russian hill community association, not for the russian hill neighborhood as a whole. >> so the task force is aware, there is a conservative

so mr. leigh, would you like to have considered your rather lessons learned considered to become no longer a single submission of your own but to be blended into the larger body of the report? >> i think basically the answer -- my answer is yes. to the extent the task force agrees with this, i would actually love to have it be supported or this notion be supported by the task force of the hole. i have one small concern which i can hold on to. if at the end of the discussion we only have three, i guess we're going to have four with member tidwell. but let's say depending how this discussion concludes, if we have only one or two, it wouldn't bother me as much. but if we only had one member that was captured in sort of in the context of individual members, recommendations and lessons learned, i think it could be awkward for the report. it doesn't bother me a whole lot. i could live with it. but it could little a little odd . >> so the answer is yes, and in a moment we'll go back to the top on this. i

mr. leigh: i would strike open house and lgbt community center. mr. mcdonnell: removing them from this list. any additions? mr. pilpel: i am looking at it. it is changing. >> i withdraw the comment. mr. mcdonnell: ok. so, we have -- can -- >> can i suggest eureka valley? ms. tidwell: i just deleted eureka valley. some of those are encompassed with what the other neighborhoods are. mr. pilpel: i don't think i agree with that. i think eureka valley is in district 8. >> adding eureka valley. mr. mcdonnell: there is no need to create an exhaustive list. mr. pilpel: ok. all right. mr. mcdonnell: any other additions? moving then to d 9. mr. pilpel: i would suggest vernal heights. mr. mcdonnell: objections? >> i will turn this over to the consultant. >> there is no publicly cemented neighborhood boundary. -- publicly submitted neighborhood boundaries. it is split in the department of elections. >> i am willing to call it north and south. it is in district 9. mr. mcdonnell: jamie? >> looking at the -- is this planning more elections? looking at the planning d

. >> mr. leigh? >> yes. >> miss melara? >> yes. >> i'm sorry, could you repeat the proposal? >> 64 reversinging it from d-3 back to d-2. sorry, other way. reversing it from -- thank you. >> yes. >> mr. mondejar? >> yes. >> mr. pilpel? >> i'm in favor of fewer so i think i'm no on the question. >> mr. schreiber? >> yes. >> miss tidwell? >> yes. >> please make this change. as you're doing that can you give the new deviation or temporary deviation. >> for district 3 the temporary >> for district 3 the temporary deviation is negative 3.5%.

leigh: i believe there was a comment about delegating authority to someone to make final grammatical mr. mcdonnell: edits mcdonnell yes. ms. leigh: other than that, not to my knowledge. are you satisfied it is final? ms. tidwell: yes, with the exception of the vote and final grammatical fixes. mr. mcdonnell: okay, two pieces? >> combine them. mr. mcdonnell: all right, i entertained a motion to delegate the final edit responsibility to ms. tidwell and approval of the final report. >> so moved. >> second. mr. mcdonnell: alright, is there any objection? >> not objecting, but what we do a roll call on the final report. 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.

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 you. ok, any other questions? any public comment on budget? thank you so much. moving to item number eight, general public comment. on non-agenda items. ok. excellent. just before we adjourn, ms tidwell? ms. tidw

leigh: yes. commissioner alonso: yes. >> please make this change. yes, mr. schreiber. commissioner schreiber: i had this on my list as something that you mentioned. commissioner pilpel: the tingly trade that i describe the other day and we did not come to consensus on doingis to take the area south of 280, north of tingly, i don't have the numbers here. move that back to 11. take the aread south of st. luke's, all the way down to randall. 723 is what is nets out. move that down to 8. below 280, there were three or four blocks that would go from 11 to 9. >> this is the proposal we have down before. >> it is the same proposal, correct? >> interested in revisiting? commissioner tidwell: i am not quite understanding. commissioner schreiber: no. commissioner mondejar: no. vice chair lam: no. commissioner leigh: i would be open to hearing the rationale. i am fine either way. commissioner alonso: no. >> we will not hear that set of proposals. ok, that concludes our list. let's take a moment and zoom back out. if you could get population deviations 1-11. >> deviation for distr

mr. woodruff. how are you? leigh's okay? >> she's great. she's got another book coming out in september.mus: good. she's welcome any time, as are you. >>guest: it would be wonderful. >>imus: we have a new abc web series that you're hosting called "standing up for heroes." tell me about that. >>guest: this is a new one. there's a lot that has not been talked about more is the long-term careers for those veterans when they come back from the wars. we concentrate a lot on those who come back, certainly those who have been injured, those who need jobs when they return, the unemployed. there is a bigger question about what's going to happen when so many retire now that the wars are winding down. we've got about 150,000, 180,000, i think, last year that retired. about 300,000 anticipate ford this year. so we have to try to get them on the road. we're trying to put together -- a veteran when he comes back, tied up with a mentor and some sort of company, certain type of work to try to give them encouragement and information to get these connections to go into this world that they want to enter.

mr. conway, h.p., sf-city. this is an incredible accomplishment. and i want to thank our new officers. this is a sight for sore eyes. this is what mayor leigh made possible through his work with the board of supervisors. this information technology is going to them. they are more second knowledge sandovaly. look at them. they are younger. they were raised on laptops. i want to thank everybody for being here and making this possible. thanks. [applause] >> i want to reasure everybody that even though we couldn't share information, we are a very chatty police department, and we told everybody what happened the day before. our next speaker is no stranger to really anything that is progressive in the bay area. he has been a great friend to the city and to me, and that would be ron conway, chairperson of s.f.-city. [applause] >> thank you. it is an honor to be here. i represent sf-city, which is an organization that i founded in january. it is kind of a product of the election of ed leigh as mayor of san francisco and more specific engagement in the city. sf-city has approaching 300 member companies in the city of san francisco. these are all tec