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 district two is that - 5%. deviation for district 3 it is 3.84%. district 4 is -5.6%

that would be inmate timothy schreiber. >> timothy schreiber has transferred here from another state prison. unlike most new arrivals, he is sent immediately to administrative segregation, a 23-hour a day lockup unit for disruptive inmates. >> oh, i get the room with a view, huh? >> at the facility that he was housed at just prior coming to limon, he was found with a weapon, a homemade knife, so he did have some charges that were pending and, as a result, he just went straight into our segregation unit. >> msnbc, any time you need me i'll be here. >> we did learn that schreiber did like to talk. not only to our crew -- >> these people are threatening my very life -- >> he also had a lot to say to the correctional staff helping us set up for the interview. >> i'm sure you just stick that key in there and turn. it's not all that complicated, ma'am. >> oh, my. >> right now i'm really in fear for my life. >> are you ready to go? >> i'm not talking to you. i'm talking to the press right now. >> oh, i'm sorry. i didn't mean to steal your 15 seconds of fame. >> when he finished verbally spa

schreiber? >> yes. miss tidwell? >> yes. >> please make the change. >> we have one more population move that we wanted to bring to you. this one is between the district seven and district four. this is a congressional line you would align to. it's 19th after median. it would move from 7 to 9. total population -- >> 7 to 4 you mean? >> yes. how can it move from 7 to 9? >> yes, 7 to 4. not 7 to 9. >> what's the population? >> nine. >> resulting deviation? >> the resulting deviation would be for district four, negative.96% and four district seven, negative .3%. >> ok. any questions? >> i guess i would like to know, i drive there a lot. i don't see anyone living on the medium. can you tell me a little bit more about that? >> the census apparently have more responses from that median. >> the median speaks. [laughter] >> well then maybe they're very small. thank you. >> mr. alanso? >> yes. >> mr. leigh? >> yes. >> miss melara? >> yes. >> miss lam? >> yes. >> miss mondejar? >> yes. >> mr. pilpel? >> i

schreiber. i thought you had your hand -- >> i did. >> this is the question whether we reunite the mission or not. that's what we're visiting or revisiting right now. so i don't -- i have a point of view. should i express that now or later? i guess my point of view is that i think that while we received a lot of testimony very recently proposing to put that into d-6 overall, we also received a lot of positive feedback at reuniting the mission as we have in the current map. that is where i would keep the line. >> thank you. miss mondejar, you want to say more about this before we consider it? >> well, the consideration was the tenderloin area. let me ask, could you give us the breakdown on asian population. >> in the highlighted area? >> in the highlighted area. >> just one second. >> we're going to take the shaded area off. if you would just keep an eye on that so you can see it a little better. this is percent asian population . and this is 15th street right here. the little bit darker shaded b

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 deviation is negative 3.5%. for district two the temporary deviation is negative 4.54% and for district one negative 5.23%. >> thank you. >> and the population being 270 with deviation. >> population for this is 331. >> that's what i said. >> deviation for district one would be negative 4.78%. for district two, next to 5%. we're going to look at the decimals right now. look at the decimals after the change. can we make the change temporarily? >> yes, please. let's not presume there's agreement. sorry, even though we discussed it. miss tidwell? >> discussion? >> i'm sorry. >> two points i believe it would be in range, it would be 4.97. >> you said discussion? >> yes. that's not a question though. we -- >> can we look at the layer of sequences defined? >> what does that have to do with this question? >> got it. >> there'

commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner tidwell: no. commissioner melara: yes, because of the school. i am concerned about the other things that need to be done. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. please make this change and let's move to the other part of lake. if we could see the population for the block between 25th and 26. lake and california. >> that block? it has a population of 333 people. >> i would propose we move that blocked. -- that block. >> the population -- the deviation for district one would-be -4.1% and a deviation for district 2 would be -5.64%. >> we're close to the zone. commissioner alonso: friendly amendment? we go back to cathedral hill and see if there is any population left in that sliver of what the current boundaries are. the population and deviation? >> 277 people would bring the deviation for district 22 -4.81% and a deviation for district 5 to 1.99%. >> i would so propose this. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. commissioner tidwell: no. commissioner schreiber: no. commissioner pilpel: no. commissioner mondejar: n

commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner tidwell: yes. chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. let's go to [unintelligible] please. population is 49. >> that is correct. a population of 49 trade it would bring the deviation from district to two 0.51%. -- 4.96%. commissioner tidwell: yes. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner pilpel: not a street, no. commissioner mondejar: yes. vice-chair lam: no. commissioner melara: yes. commissioner leigh: yes. commissioner alonso: yes. chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. >> i have one final tweaking in russian hill. right now we have the boundary -- the southern boundary of that and goler at the top of union, correct? is that union? can we bring it down to green from venice to leavenworth -- van ness to leavenworth? >> that is a population of 1048 people. the deviation for district to up to -2.7% and a deviation for district 32 -5.44%. chairman mcdonnell: discussion? >> i propose it. chairman mcdonnell: it depopulates 3 and we heard from public testimony from the russian hill communi

schreiber, no. commissioner schreiber: i would go to 27. commissioner pilpel: yes. commissioner schreiber: no. commissioner pilpel: i would like goat -- would like to go back to russian hill. chairman mcdonnell: let's stay right here. the lake st. proposal. >> i will make a counterproposal. same thing but rather than going west of 25th i would consider east of ninth to get a population and see if that does it. probably to the seventh, 6, fifth. >> that is seventh? would you like to go further? >> what is the population? >> 1514 people. deviation -- >> boeing -- keep going. >> 1926. this is fifth avenue. >> you have current lines already reflected, correct? >> that is correct. >> 1926. the deviation? >> the deviation for this area would be for district 1, -4.89% and for district two, -6.80%. the current boundary goes down 11th ave. >> i will throw that one out. i mean, propose it. commissioner tidwell: no. commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner mondejar: no. commissioner alonso: no. commissioner leigh: no. commissioner melara: yes. vice-chair lam: yes. chairman mc

schreiber: yes. ms. tidwell: yes. mr. mcdonnell: thank you. on the second question, using the consultant descriptions as submitted by consultants. 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 --

schreiber? >> no. >> ms. tidwell? >> no. >> ok, next. >> and to be replace technical advice, i would replace that with technical assistance. >> which line? >> just the line before the end. >> because? >> i think we received technical assistance more so than technical advice. we also received advice, granted but it was technical assistance. i just think it's more descriptive, that's all. >> ok, so again, if we have this discussion over speech, we could be here all day. it's not that it isn't worth -- >> i didn't see this until last night and i didn't have an opportunity to review it until now and we're being asked to vote on this, so -- >> excuse me, you're saying you didn't get the first draft? >> none of this was changed. >> this has been in the draft from the beginning. >> the earlier draft had yellow all over the place. i thought that was a working draft that was in process. >> ok, we're here now. thank you. what we don't have time or interest in doing is debating speech. what we want to focus on is fact and conten

schreiber, mr. pilpel, mr. leigh, 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.

schreiber, mr. pilpel, mr. leigh, 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

schreiber? >> just under district two. including d.-1 is one of the options to be consistent with the discussion on d-5. >> ok, member advertise well, sorry to disrupt your insertion but can you jump down to district two for a moment and the vista and whether to include and the vista in d-1 so d 2 and d 5. thank you. mr. pill pell? >> -- pilpel? >> i'm not sure wife we have reasons and are adoption. >> i was going to get to that. any other edits ms. lam? >> after ms. tidwell adds hers, i want to make it consistent with the format. >> very good. anyone else? >> yes, we still have the question of district seven, drafted by member tidwell? >> we'll come back to that that moment. we just need for ms. tidwell to catch up with us. she's entering her two districts. while she's doing that on the heading, on the reasons for adoption, that should not be there. we aren't offering reasons for adoption. >> i propose that sorry, district considerations as opposed to findings, which would more suggest the one to five. >> sure. >> ok, so

schreiber. member schreiber: ok. member lam: yes. member melara: yes, i am fine wiht that. -- with that. chair mcdonnell: the only thing i would ask is that he would title this section appropriately. that these are the recommendations of individuals. as opposed to minority opinions. there may be some constituents. so it is clear what folks are reviewing. member leigh: i think i am ok with this. i'm trying to imagine what it might look like and what it might contain. chair mcdonnell: in general, a volume and two sentences. member leigh: that is part of what i'm grappling with. if it ends up being completely open to whoever wants to contribute what ever thought, it could end up looking different than our own opinions. if we are all comfortable with that, that is fine. i'm willing to go with it. bring it back and see what it looks like. member alonso: i will see you back here in 2022. chair mcdonnell: 4 lessons learned on recommendation, what we have agreed to do is move forward with each member representing his or her points of view ar

. >> we were with timothy schreiber on his first day at the limon correctional facility in colorado. >> i have seven months to do, so i don't know what's going to happen after that, but i'm going to segregation. 23-hour lockdown. >> he was nearing parole on a six-year sentence for sexual assault and had just transferred in from another colorado prison. >> i just happened to be down there filming the new inmates coming in, and timothy schreiber immediately said he wanted to be part of the show. >> msnbc, any time you need me, i'll be here. >> and within a very short period of time did something that was so shocking to me, i couldn't believe it. >> i am a sex offender. i'm a violent sexual predator. >> he very loudly started proclaiming himself as a sexual predator. >> an attempted sexual assault on a 13-year-old girl. >> having a sex offense in prison, in some prisons it's tantamount to a death sentence, but in almost any prison facility, you are going to be harmed if you are a known sex offender. >> i have a history of repeated flashing. i'm like a serial flasher. >> schreiber could

commissioner schreiber: no. vice chair lam: none. commissioner melara: did we give up on the mission bay campus issue to bring it to the 16th? >> yes, we did. we addressed it and determined not to. commissioner leigh: no. commissioner alonso: no. commissioner pilpel: i don't think i have any. >> we need their attention. other than the 64-person thing we talked about earlier, we have absolutely correlated and minimize the number of ballot types. >> as much as we could come we could just put them off to you. >> after this draft is complete, i would go back inn the areas that there were changes to make sure that there were not other issues. >> ok. i was hoping to take a recess again soon. >> thank you for that proposal. could you name the others that were non-population related. >> hopefully, these are all still properly. there was a change made between districts two and 3. the alliance with the bart district line. the next one was between three and 6. it moved from 6 to 3. between districts 9 and 10, there was an alignment with the bar

schreiber? >> i am not ready for this, or maybe ever. chairman mcdonnell: in the interest of moving our decision-making forward, the not-yets don't actually help us. if not-yet if there is a subset of the proposal i would like to consider or if the not-yet means i would like to consider something else, state what the something else. let me start over one more time. ms. tidwell? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: and what you would like to look at? >> st. luke's. chairman mcdonnell: mr. schreiber? >> my answer is still no, but if other task force members present compelling ropes, my vote is no right now. chairman mcdonnell: thank you so much. i am going to marry you off to someone before these are over. ms. mondejar. >> no. chairman mcdonnell: no, never? >> no to this proposal. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. ms. lam, for clarification, the stoney ford for stony brook move for the 9-11 border would go into --

schreiber? >> can you refresh my recollection as to the public testimony in support of this? >> it was just this evening, that their community is in district eight, and it looks like they are on the back of the hospital. >> all right, yes. >> chairman mcdonnell:, ms. tidwell. >> i think i am interested in that block as a trade. although i am opening to making this change, i didn't want to add further population to eight. i am willing to do a trade there. could i hear about that? chairman mcdonnell: not at this moment. >> then i am a no at this point, but i am willing to reconsider if it is a relatively fair trade. chairman mcdonnell: thank you. mrs. mondejar? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: ms. lam? >> the borders for the highlighted proposal. >> 27th street, duncan, guerrero and san jose. >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: thanks,. ms. melara? >> yes. chairman mcdonnell: mr. leigh? >> no. chairman mcdonnell: and mr. alonso? >> no. >> please make the change. chairman district eight at 3.98 and district nin

commissioner schreiber: yes. commissioner mondejar: yes. vice-chair lam: yes. commissioner melara: no. commissioner leigh: yes. commissioner alonso: yes. chairman mcdonnell: please make this change. ok. >> can i ask , are we taking the question of the conservatory of the -- off the table? it would be tough to do given what we just did but to have the sunnyside conservatory remain in district 8? that was one of the public speakers, the point of view she raised. on monday night we moved that line to baden, taking the conservatory from 8 where it is now out in the world and we moved it to seven. ok. based on the map, it would be non-contiguous a that would not be possible. i am puzzled by the fact that was what i thought motivated our interest in having the conversation and now as results -- as a result of the move we just made, we precluded the possibility of having that conversation. >> i do not think we have precluded any conversation. what i interpreted from the public comment is there was some concern that came up today or recently about the conservatory. the

member schreiber: yes. it should be considered for the task force -- before the task forces established. member pilpel: yes. member lam: yes. member leigh: yes. member alonso: yes. chair mcdonnell: those two. ms. melara will craft. >> for the process, i know that i will be the first draft tomorrow -- i will have the first draft mark. when we are still getting together, this will be the last time we're going to meet. we should still have a computer available to make changes. i do not know what you're going to do with that. chair mcdonnell: think about that for a moment. i will last a few of any recommendations in that regard. hold that for a moment. the other piece of the report we need to consider, thank you for an initial draft. >> are we going past community outreach or are we leaving that out? chair mcdonnell: everything else, we will do individually. >> i would make section 5 of the report with their reasons for increasing deviation. chair mcdonnell: did you have a point of view on where? ok. what you h