tv Redistricting Task Force SFGTV April 10, 2022 8:00pm-12:01am PDT
we are attempt to bring proposal unattended lines in the meeting. there are a few of them. >> hello. >> begin. >> excellent i'm joshua i live in d6 in soma that will be part of the butchered d 5 i call in the left night and i will continue to they are a time suck to my job and schedule i'm in a support of map 4d maintaining tenderloin and soma and second i was on the line last night listen to you to the end i can't believe you are making decision this is impact 800,000 at 2 a.m. may be you have a cut off time
for the press and press the voices you heard. i'm surprised not much done to address the public out kroi yesterday. you know i don't think anybody supports butchering the districts like in 4d in particular d five and 6. soma and tenderloin must be the same community. i heard a few comments politicizing that is a loyal you are redrawing district lines that will destroy districts and established voices. people once had a working relationship with supervisors will not have this. it is woild to remove 60% of residence denials from d five and expect folks to be okay. i want to support the weight and marginalized voice in communities.
there is allowing 5% vaerns ouzed to give voices more maintaining the 1% is designed push special interests. sit down with the community that are you understand represented and less resources boy time and moncompetence talk with them. >> thank you for sharing your comments, next speaker, please. . >> hello. hi. hello. i speak cantonese. it is after 7 o'clock and the cantonese interpreters it to disconnect from the call. again with your comments we will record the comments and take note where they are all in the recording and have the trnz translations delivered the task
whole black districts -- it makes no sense. well, it does. you just don't want. and events where an appearance they passed get a well test from the nonsense. there are many of us w to decide. we need a rough tax on them. the translateors had to disconnect. but we can record your comments and have them interpreted.
next speaker, please hello can you hear me? there are 2 of us hereby we will pass to my colleagues here. speak spanish i can translate and i will go second. >> you are going to translate for someone who is with you and after they are done you will give the translation and psz it to someone who speaks english. that will be me.
>> my name is which i shell mendoza i live in district complen work in district 5 i'm in support of community unity map and want to support 4 d. we want to have rep 7ation and historically latin ecpoe have not had this according to the amount of folks we live here in san francisco. map 4b is d is not perfect but a good beginning point which we can work. and i live -- in district one.
i work in district 9. i lived here for 4 decades. 4d in democracy is the map from which we have to start. we had one that goes 8 to 1. it is very, very important to that to the life of working people. that the way that b have been developed bricking up the different w class communities. the trickery of the language of
folks supporting and saying they are in the involved in politic this is is politics. so, it is can't be rig norred and attacks so 4d is the map from which we want to be working. we ask you folk and the particular fers to follow the instructions of people who have been calling we are not paid. we are focusing on the community who have taken time off to be ail to be on this line for a long time. thank you very much. >> thank you for sharing your comments, thank you to michelle mendoza bringing your parents and interpreting the comments. next speaker, please. >> good evening, thank you to the task force we are continued arc mazing and hard work. i'm richard car delo i lived in
district 3 and on russian hill for 40 years. it seems there are 34, 794 people 4 percent of preponder ligz. will need to end up in i different district from the one they are in. d 3 the largest deficit and needs additional 7, 071 residents. district 3 is on the negotiate corner of the city. it is learning low defined by the bay. water on 2 sides.
comments, next speaker, please. >> good evening the task force i'm nancy tongue a board member of sf cause and democratic county cent roll committee. currently in d 9. and i have been callingly and i'm call nothing again to express my support for map 4b. the map address said population growth. for each neighborhood [inaudible] that is split. a lot of people i heard commenting today have talked about existing reps with supervisors but i will say this, you know i don't care if they go in d 9 or 10 and d 11 together. but the community should be together.
the solution of american voting power in the left redistricting is something. the task force will remedy significant and important and to the extent that it silenced voices something this i hope that the task force will take seriously. now the district draws the lines that the shape the city. what i say is thank you for your independent gentlemen and reasons on the important issues i'm shockd and surprised but not shockd and surprised. instead of open discourse the conversation evolveed, tax on individual commissioners. and that there is an attempt to admonish to remove
thank you for sharing your comments, next speaker, please. >> thank you. i'm chris bark are a redent of potrero hill. i want to thank you for the courage to make tough decisions in the face of surprising attacks. there are, lot of competing acts here and some people will be unhelp with the maps that the draw. i'm not going to pretend this i'm a member of a disadvantaged community but i feel like our neighborhood has more in common with the dog patch in terms of shared history and struggles and makes less sense it split from
the dog patch than foinld i way to keep the 2 together. thank you very much for your time here. >> thank you for sharing your comments, next speaker, please. >> hello will my name is meg i'm a district 8 residence den and mother of 2 children in know front i'm thankful other work the task force has been doing. thank you for stanning up to political pressure. and most of all thank you for center being your w to redistrict the city to ensure fair representation today and the future. equality matters 1 vote is the bases for democracy. it is in the here to protect the stats quo or special interests or here to protect the power of individual politicians.
equity money giving each person equal voting power. we must folk ulgs on the preponder ligz of the eastern foergz everportions of our city and, count for the growth in the east. mroedz continue to work from this. fur b like bravo is the map to address population growth. we have to acknowledge the greenhouse effect and we can't continue giving less voice to the people and making. thank you for your time and your service. thank you for sharing your comments, next speaker, please. thank you this is i'm calling as an i have to say that i support
you guys. work you have done and i'm just shocked at the ref ligzs how people, politicians who are supposed to remain on the side lines are going all in make thanksgiving personal. understand members could be removed if there is you know a poor job. if there is mismanagement but i have been with you every step and don't agree with everything but you have been up standing and done anup standing job. i grew up in the city. a green party, worker's party. i'm embarrassed at when progressives have turned into and when they are doing now and i stand with you and the job you are doing. keep at it.
home stretch, we got your back. that is when you gotta know and you know whatever side we come on -- we got your back. stick in there we will stick up for you you are stick up for us. thank you. thank you for sharing your comments, next speaker, please. >> good evening i'm jeff revvingal residents of san francisco since then 76. i think we roleized the redistricting press is a full on battle with progressive and immediateerates in the city. interesting considering each the meetings starts youring political enters for correspondidates even though everyone is aware from the beginning. that is what this it is about. clearer demonstrated by obvious
that everyone mobilization by both sides and the scripted comments. all the coi's are hard socioeconomic and around land use and criminal justice. there is in way considering the source of the appointments or the organizations some of measures after them when consider the fairness of the process. as far as the map boarders go d4 is urn the population. moving those neighborings from the map and d 7 and moving d 4 bound row from 19th to funston and flult deviation of points for 3% the commune are interest we expand in the inner sunset this makes sense and no reason
not to be considering them. thank you for your consideration and time. >> hi. can you hear mow. why we can hear you. okay. i'm a member of the bhp and like to thank you for a foiblely accepting our idea to put lurl in the sunset district. we wish for the students from the high school from all citied with high schools to attend i summer program and veterans in math and science offered boy the ati group in sunset. it is hopeed join the fourth. we help that the pel trolla
district in the 10th. we can't give much to when we wish for but you are doing the best you can. thank you. why thank you for sharing comments, next speaker, please. am hi. i'm jan ferien a resident of district 2 i want to district my comment at the redistricting task force in support of each and every member wing on the initiative for months. ive upon sustained with the redistricting task force and the decision they have all chosen fair low to do. i would like it reity rit support for the evolution of map 4 b. sea cliff in onin are sunnet and mcgonigleden gate in d sxeven reu notice port with visitation valtow protect the acl xunt and
their voice heard. i want to emphasize that there is a lot of noise from loud voice fist you look they have all coming from one or 2 districts the process is transparent and fair and dem crediteck. and we should not allow them to intrefr the press because one supervisor is upset about outcome. thank you very much. thank you for sharing your comments, next speaker, please. >> hi. >> i'm benita and called men times. i just wanted thank the task force some of you were appointed by the mir some boy the board and 3 member lee, rein and cooper by the san francisco election's commission who are threatening to remove you
because some a few political group and lected pol suspicion tigzs are in the getting there are way with the mapping you with other clothes begin within00% and served with integrity and fairness that goes for all of you. >> who said this was i wuk in the park. the population changed. people are leaving san francisco buzz they don't feel safe living here. and it is expensive. the task force you rose to the challenge. tru civil servants who don't get compensated for what you are doing. tax fiesing family time, health and jug emyour lives for the past few montes to be in long meetings that run through the notice. when you are not in motings you are up with community and cult
roll groups. again, on your time, your dime. the 4e map is in progress. put your heads together and election election commissioners dot right thing got hearing be trough and honest and don't let a few politicians bully or scare you they can't accept and fearful no one will support them should the map move. you took on this duty because you love your city like we all do. >> next speaker, please. thank you for sharing your comments. i'm calling distraught about when i'm seeing and hearing. why is this ms. clanked chandler from before. yes.
we are on the same agenda item you spoke on we have to move on the it next speak peep can't speak a second time. thank you. >> i have concerns about the mapping process. my concerns are capture in the an article in the 48 hills journal. i like to read it. as much of it as i can and ask the task force members to comment. the title is -- big rolls royce in gop money is a move to gerrymander san francisco districts. why does the task force change direction. what is going on behind the scenes. writer quote it is an e mail that was written boy a nick po
del. special quotes the e mail we are in the final week of the redistricting process. and it is better than i dreamed the draft map 4 b will slip 3 districts with progressive sproirzs to mod rit majority and 2 other districts which are progressive majority competitive with a 50/50 voting block split. the progressive -- organized enough. . would you fill out one click e mail attachd and support of the redistricting map 4b now. the redistricting task force found no audio.
task force members to commentom this and responded and take objection to it address those to the writer. thank you. >> thank you for sharing, next speaker, please. >> yes. i'm julie sue and i'm on the california democratic party board since 2005 and lead cochair of the number. i want to commends the task force you had an arduous task. y seen each one of you be fair and just in your deliberation bunkham your considerations. being heard distinctively not mean you get your way. stack force lynched to comment for hours that's why they dot mapping after the meet and in the late hours. and for people to criticize that
is one thing but personal attack system appalling perhaps we should go back when we didn't have district elections i'm a fourth generation san francisco and before we went to district elections we had more women. we had more ap i's the large minority group the largest minority group more representation then. i agree with what you are doing it stay difficult task we had population change and i will be there to challenge anybody on the election commission who wants remove the 3 members and dot good work we have your back we are all dedicated to making sure san francisco is represented. for those of you personal attack others way to do temperature no. look at fair and just.
thank you very much. thank you for sharing your comments we have one more caller in the queue could we be connected to the call or the topic of mapping. >> hi, this is -- hi. can you hear me. >> yes, please, begin. this is hilary i call in the a couple times i'm president of the glen park association and call in the on behalf of the association. but i'm calling on behalf of myself and i want to say hai want to stay with our communities that we are neighbors with that does not money we want to pick a supervisor. i am seeing a lot of callers saying they think they should be a way buzz they want a person's
district i think this is wrong. i don't think how this process should work. and i think that it is trough that the population groups of the city has been uneven over the last decade and should be balanced and people in district 6 and 10 if we don't increase the area of the west side district the people in 6 and 10 are going to be under represented. i don't want to see san francisco board of supervisors turn to a version of the u.s. senates where certain people have more voice and votes are more powerful than others because of the place where they live. the low density accomplices. people in high density don't deserve to have votes dillowed i'm horrified by what is happening with the election commission. -- i want to commends you for the w you are doing i know you
are all volunteers it it is up me to see personal, taxes and attempts to remove commissioners task force members dog their best this process. thank you very much. i appreciate the opportunity. thank you for sharing your comments we have more caller in the queue. we have someone when joined us in 408 i will bring this speaker forward at the lect urn. >> i'm john dunbar 18 year residence denial of district 5 and act itch in local pol teches president of homeowner's association in the fillmore district. i have to say the district 5 loirns that connect where i live and the tl and central soma does not make sense. i don't see the community of interest. and the fact is jeopardy an town
which is small has may be 5,000 people in san francisco. i being be wrong. am they are cut in half. they are disadvantaged boy in map. look at the neighborhood who is have been advantaged that would be sea cliff. i don't know anyone who identifies live nothing richmond and rusian hill. last fall the judiciarying town community organized. defeatd that proposal and so you know a few montos the reward is to cut them in half that is in the fair to j town or district 5 i hope that can be correchere.
thank you for sharing your comments, look out in the rom to see if there is anyone more, we have a couple folks remote. being you connect us to the next speaker, please? >> good evening i'ming carol eto i'm a voter in san francisco for over 50 years special i'm very appalled at the attacks of 3 of your members being challenged
for integrity. than i were each vetted before they were appointed by election's commission and i help that at the special hearing tomorrow this the commission will regain insight what is really going on with the action. but as important i want to thank the hours for your hours of service. uncompensated and -- for your support to keep japantown and western edition together in district 5. previous speaker referred to the japanese-american community is 115 years olds in this city. criminalitied tremendous low over the last 75-80 years since they were sent, way from the
city during the war. i want to thank you for the consideration, i live in district 7 and appreciate the consideration of the omi community thatments to go become to district 11. i'm a previous member of our homeowner's situation and you understand 've understands that this -- this joint 10 years ago was disruptive to the district's omi community people and residents and i hope that the bounds easier to, luhem to go become to 11 will be respected to your next few days of deliberations. thank you very much. >> thank you for sharing your comments. do we have more callers who want to provide public comment. why mr. clerk there are no callers in the queue y. we
reached the end of public comment. we heard from 121 speakers today i think is the same number as last night. >> thank you. close public comment. mr. -- chasel lee. >> thank you. i was thinking of having a conversation about the monopolies unless people want a break first. >> about to have a conversation about the mapping but it seems people want a break first. >> that's what i was getingly red to do. i think we have been here since you all since 3 o'clock it is now 8 i think we need a dinner break. i do. and i just need little guidance on how long it should be y. 30 minutes. that's fine with me. i don't know what is close we will figure it out.
we will -- recess until it is 7:52. say 8:30 not sooner >> the redistricting task force is called back on order out of recess. we will start mapping but i think we node to say is that we will be in session at 3 o'clock several of our members have to be at election's commission at 1. . 30 and i will be there as 1. . 30 but become by 3. . >> okay. so -- i'm ready when you are.
>> the item this is is called is mapping that it is agenda item tw on today's agenda we heard from 121 vases during public comment this was taken prior to recess and -- i see names in the roster waiting from you mr. chair on mapping. why let's get started with the names. mr. chasel lee. where second, mr. chair. >> i slept 2 hours last night. why me, too. i started mapping after the impact of yesterday's votes. >> and -- if jamie can pull up the map i would like to -- um -- yes. so -- i -- like to map. okay. i'm sorry. i would like to start -- the
portal -- the vote having gone the way it did, i think it is only improper to put it become where it is now. because that it is the least change option for that area. so -- if we could put portal in university mound back to district 9. gi didn't understand the last part you said? >> putting the partol on university mound north of mans fell in district 9.
that's -- it is pretty comprehensive. that's where you are putting perral. >> where it was before. why okay. >> had is up -- i'm putting forth before -- and north of mansesfell. g g into district 9.mansesfell. g into district 9. highlighted area is north area in portal and university mund and mc clarin park to the north
to steiner. east along waller to steiner and south on steiner to herman and herman to buchanan. yea. and then north on buchanan to hate to octavia. and then up market street >> one moment. buchanan to octavia. buchanan to hate. hate to octavia. >> okay. that is the concern one. i think -- buena vista part is
[inaudible]. >> i with hold [inaudible]. that's find this it is a proposal i did all this for us to discuss it. yea. mr., are you -- all the districts are within population rate. i was just in the queue to get the cultural district in district 6. who is this tonight. one? >> yea >> somebody took it off.
>> okay. thank you. the first member -- chasel lee was portal f. i would like to talk about portal well a bit. why somewhat inspired by the conversation we had yesterday with member pierce we were able to have an open and honest conversation about what we are facing. and i want to thank you member pierce and thank you member lee the conversation we had yesterday that was hard and i think we handle today with maturity and honesty. so -- with had i'd like for us to be honest about the portal f.
clerk. carol there was a link that i had -- that's right. i pass today off to the remote team i believe the possesses the e mail i forward friday member ho has linked documents member ho wants to display. we will call those forward. i believe there were 2 links in the e mail? >> yea. perhaps the second one? and if -- if i can get an audio confirmation from the remote team to -- joe is having a technical catch up tell be a moment. twhiel is coming up i'd like to tell mrin to my fellow task force members when we will look at.
again, for the past month we have been asking about language minorities and where they live in san francisco. we recognized in the federal voting right's act we talk about every meeting prior to the meeting of the communities protected under the voting right's act. explained to us we cannot draw lines based on race. language minorers paw tuck and he native and latin languages. and -- in the federal voting right's act for 2020 the 2 discs protected are spanish and chinese. instructionos how to pull this
data and because what we have on the u.s. san francisco government website we can look at languages. but it come up by district. so when it come up by district it is in district 9 it look like there is a bit of chinese language speakers but we don't know where they live. they did not live in the mission district and that they lived in portal f. when i followed the instructions -- that begin mow on how to pull the data this is what we came up with. i have the slide i'm if you being call up the slide on the screen here. this is a dynamic web page.
>> i'll try to snapshot what i'm looking on my computer and give you an image so we can be looking at the same thing. sorry, just bare with me. it won't take more than a few seconds. >> i'm sending an e-mail right now. >> let me bring up the slides for the task force. hey, there we go. [laughter] >> i just sent it to you as a screenshot as well. here we go. you concludes -- you can use one
of those panels to extend the image or enlarge the image. yeah, there we go. so, what we see here is a heat map of limited english speaking chinese. don't mind the red numbers. they're not a number of the population and that's how they named each square and i don't know how to take it off because i'm not too good at this stuff but what we see here is basically the image of what the public has been telling us. we've had callers call in for months. most often in chinese. a few times in english. but they would like their communities to
be united between potrero and pay view and they tell -- between portola and bay view and they're representing low-income voices and this is an immigrant community and historically underrepresented and marginalized. from the redistricting from the process that happened ten years ago and ten years before that. we're looking at the results of gerrymandering. when we talk about what we're here to do, we're talking about how we want to protect the most vulnerable communities. we want to diminish
people of color and this community is systematically disadvantage and they're calling in on their behalf. they don't have cbo's calling on their behalf and having nonprofits calling on their behalf. they're calling on their own time and you remember early in the redistricting process, it was a mess. they didn't know what the double beats were and there would be an empty line and there were a couple arguing and they didn't know when to speak and we worked on this over and over again so day after day, they got better and better at it. and with the leaders as well. oefrmly the translator -- originally the translators did not jump in and translate how and when to listen to the peep or when your hand is raised and eventually after a few tries, they got there. so, i understand
that hard decisions to be made and we're required by law to be within five percent variance of population of every district but i want you guys, the public and i want this task force to look at what our job is. we are literately breaking up the most vulnerable community that you, we all proposed to say we're here to protect. so, he wanted to present this -- i wanted to present this information to us so we can see it and we know what we're looking at so the data is here to support the voices and the public testimony that has come to us at every meeting. i understand they were just a few callers and sometimes
it's the few callers and we recognize their voices and they're the same color, but that's because they're not well organized and they're not well organized because they're marginalized because through this redistricting process they have been, so that's all. i just want us to be real. i wanted us to have an honest conversation about what portola looks like in relation to bay view and why the communities have been begging us to keep them united. that's all. >> i'm sorry, i lost my screen. >> it's on mine. i don't know why you don't have it. >> i got it back. guest two, who
is that? >> thank you for that, member ho. i appreciate the words and i think it is important than incumbent than all of us us to keep those together and someone who immigranted. i see that in places like the tenderloin where we have people who are challenged lin guess stickily and navigate san francisco democracy which is even more challenge and i see the challenges they face often and this is actually a nice parallel within the chinese community where they come here sometimes speaking only spanish and speak
another indigenous language and i have seen that with all the variety of dialects in chinese and how that further complicates issues, right. challenges around communication and there's bias around certain ways of talking, right, so i definitely, i appreciate it. thank you for the reminder which is peaceful. i would ask dca to give us a little bit of information as to why in the memo around the voting rights acts section two, there's barely mention about language minorities and it's mentioned twice. there's a lot of pages of analysis around race
but nothing really taking into language minority. >> so, as i've briefly mentioned when we spoke about the vr analysis a few weeks ago or a couple of weeks ago and it feels like a long time ago, in terms of definition and terms used and i don't know if you remember the reference as well, the reasons that i think are oddly, odd statutory history and minority refers to things like asian populations and maybe statutory drafting but they're covered in the analysis we provided to the task force and provided to the general public lately so we looked at asian-american groups and where they are in san francisco to determine whether we had obligations under the voting rights act to create vr
districts and we've concluded there was not. >> thank you. >> does that answer your question? >> sort of. so when you talk about majority minority districts in the voting rights act, are you talking inclusive of the language minorities as well? >> that's correct. >> got it, thank you. >> thank you. guest one. >> who is that? >> cooper. >> the vote last night was the harder around potrero hill and portola and in relates to what councilmember lee pointed out, the results of that, potrero, the natural result is bring,
retain portola in district nine and all the changes on the front half made a lot of sense bringing the line between eight and nine back east towards guerrero and valencia and bringing it to upper and lower valero made sense. it's a tough one and the unfortunate results of this map that we are working on today. it puts us in some uncomfortable situations around the tenderloin and selma and the communities we have heard about their connections. when talking about what a four b based map is going to do to this area, the
original option was to have tenderloin in d five and includes parts of selma in d5. to me, i thought it made sense and it was a good start. i think the conversations i've had with folks since then, since monday night and the conversations the public feedback we have hear since then and having that central bit of selma taking out and separated from west selma is likely a bridge too far and likely something we should not really be exploring. but that brings us to what else do we do here? we're stuck with another force -- we either see the tenderloin as defined or we split up the transgender cultural district and both those
choices and i'm not sure i would find myself supporting either direction, but that's the aspect of this map we should focus on and have a robust discussion around. >> mr. chasel lee. >> thank you, mr. chair. first of all, i want to thank member ho for both setting forth the facts and makes it real, right. we can rationalize what we did, however we like, but and a lot of those rationales are valid. i'm not going to discount the validity. back to member
cooper's choice, right. redistricting is also choices. and we should just say, like, what we did as ramification, negative ramification and we just have to say we -- this is what we accepted. and just be upfront about that. i guess i forgot to explain the rational. this is round two of my explaining why i did what i did. i guess the first one was obvious. it's to bring b ten into population and pretty much leaving it as is for lack of better options. sending it to d11 creates a tribulation and
omi and we don't need that. the d8 border is contentious and we heard so much testimony from the very beginning from the valencia corridors and we heard testimony from the latinx community. and we heard testimony from the lgbtq community, right. we had lgbtq leaders come in -- as a queer person myself and not having said anything about it, yeah, i deserved it. and during my discussion with equality california and other lgbtq, they
cascaded me. okay, i deserve it. i think it's time for us to -- i think this is a way of -- uplifting those choices and that's why i made the decision to review night the transgender community the way i did. from the conversations that i had, what apprised -- what they apprised most was keeping it together. we kept it, as member cooper mentioned, we kept it together with the tenderloin district 5. or we could review night in district 6. what they cared about was unity and given the way 5b works, not 5b, this is 4b, the way 4b works. this is one way of both uniting the transgender cultural district,
putting it the same district as the leather and lgbtq cultural district which we, which as someone pointed out, we split and our second move in d6, this keeps, except for that wedge. i think the district 6 which is now district 9, but we might have to fix that later. we can fix it now, thank you. >> that's one census log that goes on both sides of 13th and can go in either district. >> i think we don't -- we can have that conversation later. this is -- and filipino is whole as member castillon pointed out. this is one way to do it under
the current configuration. if we stick with this map and i want to mention to the public, as an aside, but it's an important point that four d is alive and i said that when we voted. before d, it's still alive. if people on the south don't want to switch, we can always can, but this is a way of unifying the two cultural districts who had so much testimony and they wanted to put in the same district and keeping it together and i will, go back to where i started, i will acknowledge that the painful and definitely
impactful choice of splitting the tenderloin in this way, that's really all i have right now. >> mr. chair, i see no member - i see hernandez in the roster. >> thank you. so, obviously, a lot of thoughts there. so i'm going to start over on the valencia chunk. obviously, we heard a great variety of opinions around this area, right. it is, it was interesting
to hear, a rear amount of time -- for a rear amount of time, two communities or sub communities within the lgbtq community, the latinx and then the non-latinx talk about the differences in perspective around their relationship with valencia, right, so that's something i want to uplift, right. and of course, the massive amount of testimony that we heard from the mission community and the feeling of not feeling whole, right and then to say nothing of the america-indian cultural district, which of course is incredibly important. this of course does not make it whole and i think they've made it very clear that they don't necessarily want to be whole. they recognize that with the current demographics of the
districts that that's not possible. what i will say is that i think we might be able to come to a compromise around how -- if it's going to go all the way out to guerrero or down the alley ways, so i mean, i think and it's terrible to say this, i think we need to ask them explicitly if there's a compromise that would allow them to feel comfortable, right and it's short notice, but i mean, it's a significant proposal. so, i'm going to, yeah, i'm going to withhold content on that part. then, going up, i want to talk a little bit about d5. because yeah. this is a big one. so, earlier today, we've received
all -- a redistricting proposal. i believe it's the -- it's the building tower in redistricting and they went through a series of district deeply analyzed, deeply analytical and i really appreciate it and i would love for it to be incorporated as a coy, perhaps recognized neighborhood at the very least and if possible for it to be digitalized so we could overlay it and one thing that jumped out at me that elicit a lot of thought, the first place i've lived was in that area and a lot of the work that i did about organizing was in that area and i remember very well going up door-to-door and what is now the north of the panhandle and several times being admonished
because i called it nopa and i was told this is a western district. i was told that time and time again; right. i don't want us to be in a position where we're saying, this place is no longer a black community and i think that that is what we heard time and time again. and i think if we're going, rightfully make lower ashbury, we have to make the western district whole on the other side of the panhandle across the panhandle. i don't think that, i would not be able to forgive myself for splitting the western addition in the north of the panhandle particularly when we have clear guidance around the relationships and the important cultural locations there. and so, yes. i really do believe that if we're going to, again,
rightfully talk about united haight ashbury, we need to make the rest the western addition whole. if that's something folks are comfortable with, then great. we can do it. otherwise, i withhold consent until we talk about that issue because it's very important, i think. yeah. then, i mean, the question that's slating the tenderloin, so i have a very different recollection about hearing from the folks in the cultural districts in district 6. yes, they of course want it to be whole, right. but they also made it very clear that they were here in unity, right. that they were here in unity to keep the
tenderloin whole and the south of market. as i've said many times, i'm perfectly aware we cannot make all of it whole. something has got to give; right. i have given many reasons why it should not, at least in part the merchant communities and i do want to highlight we have heard today and many times how a lot of what we're going through is because of the mass growth we have seen in district 6 and that growth is not going to stop and it's going to continue in the emergent communities. to me, it's contra -- it's contradictory to say, oh, they're keeping it together and next time pass the buck down. i think it's non-sense cal. they clearly say emergent
community, plural. okay. i understand and if i have, had it my way, i would be final lowing all communities of interest remain together, obviously, right. if they have that infinity -- and for them to have that infinity, but for us to go after the tenderloin and go after the most vulnerable and diverse neighborhoods in the community and have them split up, right, and use the excuse of what we're hearing from the cultural districts, it's -- we need to keep the most vulnerable communities in mind, okay. and i also will reiterate that in the emergent communities and i got the numbers here. just in my census block, we have built
almost 2400 housing units. 400% in the last ten years. out of those merely, one thousand have been affordable housing units. 1,000 in one census tract of four or five blocks. that's a tiny shiver of selma. if we pull out the tenderloin, all those living in affordable housing -- but it's important to highlight that many of them, the first priority are the fortunate westerns of the -- i acknowledge that. but that actually is something that we can and these people should perform. folks in city hall should perform. and to me, then putting them in a situation where i mean, essentially, victims of redevelopment evictions and gentrification across the city would not, they would be seen
but they would have no voice in the process. they would be 30% of the population in this d6. 30% from all over the city. black, asian, latino and indigenous. some of the poorest of the poor people and all because we are insistent on the fact that these emerging communities cannot possibly be broken up. to me, that's shocking, right, that we're talking now about splitting up the tenderloin. i cannot believe it. i mean, it's absurd, right. it's absurd we have told ourselves time and time again that we're not going to look at maps and consult maps and adopt maps and essentially what we have done with district 3 is adopt wholesale d3 united. we have told ourselves we will not send any of the future growth or
past growth to d3. we have heard from china town tenants, the infinity that exist with the housing neighborhood in the trans bay terminal and we know the benefit it would give them to have access to the affordable housing. again, yeah. i don't know. i mean, i'm utterly shocked it's thursday at 9:30, two days before deadline. i mean, a day and a half at this point, right. and we're literally now talking about splitting up the tenderloin. and again, i have heard from the majority here that we will not touch the emerging communicates and i think i can give you plenty of specific reasons and how we would trump in a permanent way, they're voting
now. i don't really understand why there is to argue. 30 to 40% of residents that are making less than 50, $60,000, entire families, again, folks that come from the western addition, hunters point, evicted out of the mission, out of the richmond and out of the portola. we're putting them in a neighborhood where they're 70% of people, half of them making more than $250,000. i mean, it's a challenge, but unless we confront the fact that that is the challenge that we're doing, all we're doing here right now is just, redlining 20 or '2022. people will study this map in one hundred years and say how could these people have done that. how could these people have taken 30% affordable housing, dropped it into a neighborhood, exclusively with
no anchor point like the tenderloin. to me we need to discuss this question but the question around the western -- i mean, the hate. when i saw this map and when we split it that way i was heartbroken to see areas get split off. to me it meant we had given up on the other side of the visa -- divisadero. >> mr. jeremy lee. >> so many things to comment on. first of all, i want to say to member chaseel lee and councilmember ho for advocating. i understand your position and my aunt lives on university street. i have family that lives
out there. and i get what it feels like to have a community, to be a part of a community that is so isolated so and so -- so neglected for the city so thank you for your advocacy. in terms of the map before us, you know, i want to thank chasel lee for working out the percentages and listening to district 5 we heard from that were heartbroken that their being moved out of their community. but you know, to member hernandez gil and the area around the tenderloin, you know, i just truly feel that the
tenderloin needs to be in district 6. i appreciate what member chasel, what you did with putting together philippine that and the (indiscernible) district and trans cultural district. like yourself, i was admonished of it for not speaking up about the other minorities that i hold. i'm a queer man and it's something i'm not super comfortable talking about publicly. whether it's just an asian couple upbringing, but it's not something i'm fully comfortable talking about all-time time and some of the comments that really resonated with me yesterday were the folks from the leather district, from the trans district saying that,
like, san francisco is one of the few, it's the only place in the world where, that gives -- that gives a crap about who they are. when you're queer, you're not born into this culture. it is something that you have to learn. it's something that, like, that is taught to you by friends and there's a certain beauty in having that chosen family and it's something that is sacred and needs to be protected because you know, like, in san francisco, throughout all the changes we have been experiencing, i think one thing that has always remained constant is that san francisco is a (indiscernible) to our city. treat everyone with respect and be kind and come as you are, you know. you can dye
your hair pink and love who you love and this city will accept you and that is something that i always want to preserve. and the have the trans community and the leather community. it's essentially -- it's a community -- this community of other variety of people and they share so much of that with the tenderloin. the tenderloin is such a diverse place. just in the 200 block alone of turk, street, there's the high concentration of arabic families in city and they fight so hard to get resources and access that, you know, and just working together with other folks who are in that same position. so, you know, that is why i feel
that it is so imperative that the tenderloin, the trans district, selma filipino district need to be together. thank you. >> guest 2. >> hi. i thought there was a guest 1 in the roster. oh, okay. sorry. thank you. so, number one, it's very imperfect, but thank you member chasel lee for getting us started with this map because it's a conversation piece and i feel like this is what we're supposed to be doing right now, is starting from somewhere and moving forward, right. and boy, if i go exactly
what member ho was talking about, my eyes will get wet because it's the truth and it's heartbreaking. on that note, i do want to back up what member hernandez gil was saying about district 5 simply because i'm not drawing any lines right now on that. but my mother was born on navy road in hunters point but by the time she was four, they moved to divisadero and
haight and the panhandle was the neighborhood of the fillmore and i was one of those people because of that legacy that fusses at people when they start calling places nopa. as you guys heard, i have issues with lower pacific heights and i get why all of this stuff has changed. we live in an evolving world, so things evolve. but it's really hard to see nopa and haight ashbury as not being the same thing, so that's my level of ex-temperizing because we're sleep derived and we need to get sleep and i wanted to weigh in on family members living on
grove. it is the same neighborhood. what i really got into the queue to discuss was the situation with the tenderloin. we have to be realistic in that we have two more mapping days and we have to come to some agreement but half or a quarter of the tenderloin is, like, a quarter of a district anywhere else, right. it's an impossible hole to plug. i'm a little bit confused about how we define emerging markets, how they define emerging market and where we go from there for
the simple reason that when we had dog tact split from potrero hill, and they were from miss patch and said dog patch needs to be merged. i don't now that looks but for that that was a split in how the emerging market were thinking of themselves and coming from d10 which we think we belong together but we have several splits on how we divide up, i can hear that and understand that and sympathize but i think we need to have that conversation about what exactly are the emerging markets and how they define them -- themselves
and how and where does it rely and i understand you, commissioner castillon and how we develop communities and neighborhoods, but i lean towards listening to people where they are. i think the preponderance of people from mission bay was grouping themselves in with south park and rincon hill and the east cut but i'm not sure, so i think that needs to be something that is on the table, again, not drawing that line, not arguing with anybody. member castillon and member hernandez gil, this is your neighborhood, right. so, i can't make that call, but i am very interested in that especially since the mission bay people are always reaching out
to us in bay view like we're connected because we share the third street corridor, so that would be my focus. it ain't my focus right now. i'm sleep derived and happy to go home and sleep a little bit but i do think we need to put a call-out to dog patch and the entire east cut emerging neighborhoods to weigh in on exactly where and how they define who they are. >> thank you. you were guest 2, right? >> yes. >> mr. castillon, you're up. >> thank you, members. thank you, chair. i think this is a robust discussion and we've had a lot of conversations on the trade-off. >> into the mic, please.
>> and the trade-offs we have to be making. i'll start north of pan handle, i have heard this story time and time again about how people -- how residents will get angry with you for calling it nopa and that's the historic western addition, i think it's something worth exploring in this configuration and trying to add parts of that area to district 5. when it comes to this question around the trade-off between unifying the cultural districts and splitting the tenderloin, i'm uncomfortable with splitting the tenderloin, at the same time i do recognize that the cultural districts have expressed a pretty strong desire to remain together and something has got to give with this configuration. but when it comes to the
emerging communities, these neighbors have been coming to us since day one, really advocating to stay together. and i do want to comment on this thing about affordable housing because frankly i find it classless to be honest to say they share with the tenderloin because we have been hearing from the bmr residents themselves within mission bay and these neighborhoods saying that they share affinity with their neighbors, with their neighbors that have higher incomes than them and it's because they've been building community together and what they see is that if they are to be moved a part, that jeopardizes everything they've been working to build for these decades and for the part that jeopardizes their neighborhood to have the community to thrive. i believe the reason why dog patch got
lumped in there a little bit is because dog patch is similar in there has been a lot of development occurring there and there's an emerging aspect of it all. we've heard quite a bit about dog patches connection with portreo hill, so i want to be mindful of that. the way i view this in particular is i think dog patch to some extent can be viewed as an emerging neighborhood in some capacity. i do want to, i do want to consider how that weighs with potrero historic ties to dog patch and we heard how they say there's a freeway that separates them but they feel affinity with one another in that regard. for me, i have always been very
uncomfortable with the idea of separating the neighborhoods of rencon hills and -- rincon hills and east beach because they have been coming together and we've heard from a range of voices from that regard. there's a reason i want to hone in on this -- and what we have been hearing from the bmr tenants in this area that they share affinity with their owe wealthier neighbors and they have been able to build their communities in that regard. so, that's what i have to say about the emerging communities. >> i want to remind the fv i have all the coy's loaded onto the map so if you want to see
how the communities have been defining themselves so far i can display them quickly on the map if anybody would like that. >> thank you. >> mr. chasel lee. >> thank you, mr. chair. i want to thank member pierce for characterizing this proposal for what it is correctly. it is a very imperfect starting point, right. because we have to start somewhere. and i want to say, make it very clear to the task force and the public that i do not anticipate the distinctive stand but i don't like -- i don't like trolling people for conversation, right, which is why i was so hesitant on us putting out maps and facilitating public input which
is trolling public for a reaction. i know we live in a social media age, but that's not the way to do public policy. if we are not to do this, my question is, what are your ideas? and i'm not saying in a sense to challenge people. but it's like okay, we now have this problem and we sort it as unacceptable and now we have to find solutions. i do want to say though, having -- being born and raised in this city, it was a very odd -- it was very odd for me to learn that the western
boundary of the pl is polk, for one thing. that was never my understanding glowing up. it was always van ness. i mean, elementary school itself is between polk and van ness. why would they build an elementary outside of their neighborhood. that doesn't make sense to me. i remember when i had conversations when i asked this point of why it was on polk and they responded with population. okay, sure, fine. that makes sense. they had a hard conversation and they settled on this. but i think, like, what are doing for the portola and we should call it out for what it is. under any proposal we have except for maybe the entire thing in d5 and we got a lot of
con stan nation. it's also split. we have just said, it's worth -- we cannot stop splitting here and not splitting there. and that's fine. those are perfectly valid points. you i don't think we should come here and say we're not splitting the pl because under any mass map that i have seen except for the one with all the (indiscernible) on d5, maybe some other ones i can't remember. i've only had two hours of sleep. when the line is on polk, the pl is already split. let's call it out for what it is. and so, i would say okay, i also want to say to
member hernandez gil, i got all your -- i got all your points and they're very valid and i'm glad that you put that on the record. and so, i will go back and ask my fellow members, it's not this, then what because only that can move us forward. and i'll say that's a challenge. i say that in good faith and that's all. >> >> guest one. is that you. >> i'll get to your question in a little bit. i got some ways to get to that but we'll get there. i do want to talk about, i want to talk about dog patch a little by. i think it's an interesting
conversation. dog patch is a fascinating neighborhood and i have done a lot of work there for work. it has a lot of the same similarities, same things going on in the communities and they have a lot of new construction and they're going to continue to have new construction in the pier 70, irish hill area and that's going to give it a lot of that same flavor and have the same needs as mission bay, as rincon hill and east cut. but just a strong historic cord has a block of row homes and a strong connection to the cherry hill with the dog patch neighborhood association and potrero booster and there's a connection there. my preference would be something that keeps dog patch with potrero hill. when the numbers called for that split, that's a split i would be comfortable with, but i do think testified community connection there is
strong. on haipt hate and -- on the haight and pan handle and my neighborhood and i'm near buena vista park and i -- the lower haight and upper haight, they have connections obviously -- my community of interest right there going right through there, 7 and all those connections are important. i do think that lower haight has this strong connection to the fillmore and it was the first to be back out of district 5. between upper haight and northern pan handle, my preference would be a lot of them in the panhandle area would go into district 5. the one issue with that is the numbers within this map. so, that would
be a concern i would have. i do also want to talk about this question of emerging neighborhoods and how the tenderloin fits into that conversation. i think, for me, we've heard a lot about the connections between the tenderloin and west selma and central selma because they've built a shared community and they have a lot of similar needs and similar relationships to the city. i don't necessarily see that same connection with all -- with the emerging neighborhoods. i think it's -- given the maps we have looked at, if we have the tenderloin and western selma together, it's going to be alongside at least some of the emerging neighborhoods and i think it comes back to what councilmember castillon mentioned, 30% of affordable housing is, it's a lot. that's a lot -- you know, it's not enough
clearly, obviously. don't get me wrong there, but i think i would, given how close and closely thought and closely competed elections are in this city, 30% is -- it's more than representative to care about and be responsive to that group of people. it's not like we're isolating a group of people like moving the (indiscernible) site. they may not be voting the same or thinking the same. no one is a block that i think -- when it comes to how the function of the city in thinking about how supervisors function and how supervisor offices work with the community, i think and as we have heard from the organizers from those communities, there is that there. i think that will,
this leads into the sort of -- my answer to chasel's question which is where do we go from here. i do strongly and really appreciate this map and what chasel is able to do, sorry, thank you, member chasel lee was able to do with this map. come on, we had this map last night and we finished at whatever time, 3:00 a.m. last night and in that time, we've had to respond to several sunshine requests. we both found out that tomorrow we have to go before the election of commissions to defend our service and he still had time to make a map with dozens of changes and it's really -- i really do think, happy to have discussions about
valencia and the haight and happy to have discussions and the tenderloin discussions is what we have to have with this map and i do think this is more or less as good as this map is going to get. i think all the other options with district 6, first of all, i think once we have the vote yesterday on potrero hill, d9, no-brainer. that works. d5, those changes make sense and i think, yeah, with this map, i think having to have the market street line on this map is within this context of this map. that's the choice you would have to make. beyond that, you're talking about going north and we're talking about making changes that aren't anything -- they're difficult changes from this map. so, what i want to bring us back to then and as i'm talking about what sort of proposal i think would
work and i don't want us to have a real conversation about the trade-offs that we're making with this map verses four b and with, sorry, four d and this is going to bring us back to talking about russian hill. i know it was -- a lot of folks -- i agree that we did not hear from anyone in russian hill that they wanted to be moved into district 2. i'll agree to that. we also have never heard about anyone in the tenderloin wanting to split from -- split from jones or the transgender community split. we haven't heard anyone from the panhandle, from the folks that call the western district or call it the north pan handle neighborhood association which is to be in d5. and i think you know, one of
the other changes, with this map, we did bring the projects together so that's something this map has, but when you weigh the trade-offs that we had to make on this map and where we got to on this map, when you weigh those against the trade-offs of moving russian hill to district 2 and yes. knowing after that and yes, we'll have to have conversations about far west selma and the parcels in the lgbtq district. but i think we can make it work. one other point on where we are with four b is, yes, the polk, i agree. i do think that van ness really is the true western boundary of the tenderloin. i understand that the tenderloin community was willing to give back to polk except for the elementary school for the sake of numbers but i do agree that
having -- working in this neighborhood and spending time in this neighborhood, i do agree that we -- that the tenderloin is this go all the way to van ness. but i think that's possible within the framework of four d, so that all being said, i still, as i said on monday and i still firmly believe this and it's why after the russian hill vote i said we should move to this map and take a look at this map. i believe without russian hill moving to d2, that there's no -- without that moving into d2, there's no way for that map to work and i do not know, i've tried, i have not put as much time as member chasel lee, but i've worked really hard on
trying to make a version of four d work that also honored that motion and honored that vote of keeping russian hill in d3. and between that vote and the other discussions of the members, i couldn't find a slougs -- find a solutions that works and i don't know if that's a solution that works and by works, i don't know if this is a solution that has five votes and i want to have a discussion about the trade-offs. >> guest 2. >> it's becoming, i think, pretty apparent to me that the difference here is around what we mean by fair and effective representation. right. we talk about this question of one person, one vote, right but we always understand that even that, when we see these maps, it's not actually that. when we see citizen voting age, we know
it's non-citizens and we know children are not being counted, right. so we know there's a complexity to this question of one person, one vote. that's why we use the adjusted table. that's why the adjusted tables include the prison population because we want to make sure that these people are counted, right. but also within this question of what is fair and effective representation, we need to take into account and again, the california constitution comes very clearly that communities that have different living standards, that have different and similar or different work opportunities, that is something to take into account. that is something important. we know that a block can max out the contribution every single time while another group is barely able to make
rent or why not have income. that has consequences. that is what fair and effective representation is about. and it might sound shocking to people to talk about it in this way. they might perceive it as you rightfully say, classless, but i think that's ultimately the question of why we are here, to challenge ourselves and talk about it in terms of fair and effective representation in all of its nuances. we acknowledge that immigration status, we acknowledge that age, we acknowledge that race and all these things put together make it complex. i don't understand the hesitation around acknowledging that income and wealth have an impact and that's why oakland is split north and south because of that acknowledge of wealth and income. the challenge we have with the emerging communities and before i go on, i want to state i have lived in my house
in rincon hill for 11 years and i have been a founding member and they do incredible work. i get no pleasure of making this argument but i think it's a -- it's a fair argue. to make and that's why we're here and that's okay and that's why for me, this question of, russian hill into d2 is a no-brainer. we know it's a stable community. we know it's a stable community that is not at-risk of displacement of gentrification. i think even they would be perfectly willing to recognize that. and we also know that many parts of d3 of what is now d3 north beach and china town are not as stable and at risk. it makes complete sense for us to say, you know, we
don't want to dilute, hinder their ability to achieve fear and effective representation. to me, again, that is why we're here. that's a fundamental reason. probably the only reason we're here because otherwise, an -- an algat hr im can do that. i see our discussions being (indiscernible), right. people are uncomfortable talking about wealth and income as if it didn't have income in fair representation. i don't know how that can be possible. it takes money to win elections and it's a factor. when we talk about -- the amount of influence and effort it takes, somebody who is
making $50,000 for an entire block, compared to 70% of them making $250,000 is huge. it's a notion. it's as simple as that. anyway. what i will say is this, we have plenty of examples if the last year or so where we saw that conflict. right now, i feel completely comfortable in telling you 90% of the challenges we face in rincon hill and east cut is the same as well but we have things like, the vendors over at oracle park, the janitors at task force. these are differences that are related to this question, living standards and opportunities and at some point there will be
conflicts and we need to give those communicate to have that fair and equal representation and i say that with no exaggeration. the way the map looks now, it will be studied as a way to recreate the worst elements of redlining and it will allow people to be voiceless. they'll take advantage of their beautiful neighborhoods and like i said, i love my neighborhood. i think it's clean, it's safe. a lot of it, thanks to the great work that the working class people of the east cut doing the cleaning are doing and i want to honor that. i think it is worth acknowledging that and if we want to recreate a city that's inclusive, that acknowledges, for example, the terrible tragedies of redevelopment in hunters point and the western addition and they're rightfully placed at the top of that reference, i want to make sure when they go in there and somebody comes in and says, actually, we want to remove rent
control or we want to sell off this property, that they have the ability to defend them selves, that's what fair and effective representation is about. i mean, i think this is going to come to a vote. i don't think we're going to come to an agreement about it. that's unfortunate. right. but i reiterate, i'm very, i'm scared at this point that we're 24, 48 hours in from this decision, right and i don't think we're on the same page about what we mean by fair and effective representation, but it makes -- bringing up money is perceived as something uncomfortable. i mean, it's real. obviously, it's real. so anyway. and also, i want to say for the record, i know many of the people that called in. that's why i have been very careful to say bmr renters. there's a difference in living standards between a bmr
renter and bmr owner. that's why i act like that's true. >> vice-chair. >> it was a loading place because i keep wanting to speak and member hernandez gil keeps hitting the button before me. >> we have a few people. >> go ahead. >> i didn't see your name. i didn't see you in there. don't worry. i don't mind. >> something happened. excuse me, something happened because on mine, your name wasn't in there, but go ahead. >> i was holding for michelle. >> okay, please go ahead. [multiple voices] >> go ahead, michelle. >> we're going do -- sorry folks on webex, we're going to do member pierce and then member ho and member castillon. so, i'm
going to finish with a motion because i agree, we're not going to get too much further, but i'm going to start with all of us have been talking about discussing with our neighbors what our -- what would be fair compromises and to all of you guys point about the tenderloin, i mean, the tenderloin -- [laughter] they have said that they were willing to give up, this was their compromise in this redistricting process, they were willing to give up van ness and pushback to polk and they were willing to give up post as a northern boarder and push down to gary, so they have done their contribution. it's obviously not
enough but they've actually come to the table and given up critical real-estate which leaves a lot of their people and their cultural assets behind and that's to their credit and us using that to punish them, i think is extremely unfair. if we need them to maybe shed a little more or shave a little more, we go back and tell them tonight you have 24 hours because we're talking about this tomorrow. i can do that because you guys showed up in good faith we can do that, however, i'm not making that request because this is what they've done and we're actually using it as a bludgeon to further punish them. that's my $0.02 on that part of it. dog patch and potrero hill and i have been more than once the evil person who has shaved
pieces of dog patch or dog patch in whole off, but i have to tell you that, yeah, there is the emerging markets that grow as you get closer to the bay, but in the heart of dog patch, there are a whole bunch very old, very beautiful, mostly restored victorian houses that are single-family houses, that are multi-generational currently ask have been in families for two, three, four generations. they are, excuse me the term, but what we traditionally used to call poor white trash as well as black and latino families all together growing up, third, fourth, fifth generation and some houses are being gentrified because of all of the development but this is the reason in those communities and
why they feel potrero hill and dog patch are interconnected because you have long stands old families whose kids go to daniel webster and what used to be potrero middle school and they hang out at jacksonville park and that's why they're connected. there's the legitimate bond that goes back before the 1906 quake. so, this is a century long association. i did mean to put that out there as well. with that being said, those are my two justifications for those two things. brain fried. i make a motion that we accept the citywide map as it stands right now for discussion tomorrow. that's my motion.
>> okay. member ho. >> thank you. and thanks for all of that, member pierce. i went deep onto how i hated the fact that portola is not united with visitation valley but i have started to lock at this map more clearly, there are a lot of things that i do appreciate about it. for one, where we understand that there will be additional development in d10. sorry, d6. i guess d10 -- d10 as well and there's flexibility. there's a lot of things i don't want but one of the things that's responsible for us to do as a task force is not setup the next redistricting task force ten years from now for failure
the way we were setup for failure with a difficult task, so as much as possible, i do appreciate that d6 is close to one percent and there will be additional growth there obviously, but it probably won't look like 30% which is the platform we were given and i think we have to continue to rei rate this because i think this is something that's lost on a lot of people who are very angry at this process. [sirens] >> these changes -- people don't want their neighborhoods to change and want their supervisors to change but that's not possible because so many changes need to be made to get our city into legal compliance with the federal voting rights act, the u.s. constitution, the
california constitution because of the vast differences of housing growth on the eastside of the city and the below mean on the westside of the city. so, and then there are certain areas in districts that are kind of in between and they have to move, so that's why these districts have to move so much and unfortunately, it does happen with the districts that are in between the east and westside, district 2 and district 5. so, the other thing that i like about this map is that we don't, like, everything is below 4% variance. except for d4. but as much as possible, that seems -- this strergs of -- this version of a map is closer in balance than any other map we have seen so far. and so, with
that, i'm going to second your motion, member pierce. i do also, you know, to address member gil's conversation about cutting up communities and the ones that are vulnerable and redlining, whether we started this conversation, i showed you what redlining is. like, if we're going to talk about how we don't want to redline, like, let go back to the portola conversation because that's the obvious version of redlining that we see in this entire city, so we can talk about that redlining and doing something about it or we just drop that because it is unacceptable to me that we continue to talk about redlining about the whole city when the redlining is -- is
glaringly right in front of us with portola and bay view. >> thank you. mr. castillon. >> to clarify, member ho, i believe member pierce's motion was to adopt the current citywide map. >> no, no. >> i misunderstood your motion. >> i was, like, what. clearly, i mean -- >> please don't start that. >> okay. >> all right. >> good. one modification that i meeting want to suggest because we did hear about how the tenderloin have compromised and posed their street early on and i believe the northern boundary is flexibility of a destination than polk street. i would like to explore adding a few blocks
up to post street into district 6 into this map. in particular, i know, if we can start along van ness. so starting on van ness, that block right there. can we bring up the population to see how much we're grabbing in there? >> all the way up to polk? >> yes. >> all the way up to post -- over to largon. over to haight. over to levenworth and then over
to jones. for me, the northern boundary has always been post and i know that gary is a more common definition. i've lived on gary for many, many years. there's a merchant corridor on gary and i do think it could be good for them to be kept whole in there. this is my one modification to the motion to add this into district five. >> is that a motion? >> yes. >> do you accept? >> i'm looking for consensus before i vote. oh. >> member chasel lee. >> when i made this modification
to have have the line on jones, it was meant to have a forthright discussion. i did not intend to put this line to be permanent. i was planning to move it back to mason. some of the stuff i heard today was full valid points but i must pushback on a notion that when i mentioned that the (indiscernible), it was bludgeoning those with a point. it wasn't my intention. i must say i recent that accusation. and so, my friendly amendment, if people -- if the motion is accepted, to move the line back to mason, it seems like that is
not acceptable and we find solutions from there. right. again, we're 48 hours away from saturday. three of us might be on the chopping block tomorrow. could we actually do our jobs, please. >> can we what? >> can we do our jobs we're task to do? so my amendment would be to owe o- -- -- to review night the tl for purposes of discussion because that's the purpose of the four b map. review night union square into
d3. so we can add a balance. maybe we can start exploring the know. or the haight. move it back to the tl if that's acceptable. >> clarification, with that post addition as well? no. go back to what we had originally? >> i was imagining a post position. >> no problem. >> let's look at both and see what happens, i guess. >> okay. and again my apologies, member chasel lee for -- i speak
in assemblies, it wasn't meant to be an attack on you, just as the work we're doing is not meant to be an attack on the tl. i know if t- -- it really feels that way when it's your house or your block but yeah. sorry. >> no, no. member pierce you don't need to apologize. i mean, the message was received loud and clear, so let's make it right. and let's go from here. >> is that it? mr. chasel lee is that it? >> i accept that challenge. >> guest 1. >> thank you. yeah. i think as far as this map is concerned, i think that's probably the best
change, i think. i guess we're a little over now, but we can discuss this, discuss that tomorrow. we're at a good talking point. i do want to circle back, you know, we got accused or getting accused and we'll hear more about this tomorrow at 1:30, accused of doing things in the middle of the night, i think of not just the daytime scale but the calendar time scale and i want to be cognoscente we have two mapping days left and i think i made my point clear but no matter which way we should go, i do think we should either go in tomorrow with two maps with this and something based off four d or close that door. it's really hard and it's a difficult conversation because i know there's a lot of different
trade-offs but i think -- i do think we should have this conversation. i'm going to move a companion amendment and not a competing amendment to come or competing motion that we -- committee motion and that we -- knowing this is very similar to a motion that failed before but i want to move that we discuss, that we bring up and i'll get to you an e-mail with the detail in writing, mr. carol, that we have four d with -- four d as in danger, i don't know -- >> four da. >> that's the first word that -- awful word. d as in douglas, that's a good neutral word. >> the four d map adjusted on
the four. >> i'll get there in a second. i think for us, for us to move it forward, i think it will have to have the russian hill addition as well, so it's four d with district three having a western border at van ness, broadway, jones, columbus, (indiscernible). that's my motion. >> those are the same borders you listed in order on april 4th? >> yes. >> is that it some mr. castillon. >> two things. i do -- something has gotten lost in the discussion around map four d.
russian hill was not whole in the map that we voted on. there's only one part of any of these boundaries from many of the coy maps and the neighborhood map that has broadway as the border. russian hill was not whole and i do think we need to -- so much of what we have been hearing is we've been prioritizing russian hill over the tenderloin when in reali -- we were splitting a neighborhood. i need to make sure that's on the record. second, i'm uncomfortable with us putting this forward as it stands as the proposal because district 6 is almost negative 10% at the moment and i would like to make at least district 10 but district 5 population compliant if we're to advance
it. what i would suggest here is that we do add dog patch into district 6. i know we have this strong connection with potrero hill but we're starting to hear about dog patch being an emerging communicate as well, not necessarily attached to dog patch being in district 6 but i want us to have a population compliant map in this area, so if we could add dog patch and i think it's central down to lake creek. >> you what? >> i will consent to that. >> so --
>> i'm going to make a motion that dog patch down to lake creek is added to district 6. >> dog patch what? >> dog patch to lake creek is added to district 6. >> moved where? >> to district 6. >> district 6? >> yes. >> okay. i just want to hear the motion. is there a second? i think there's no second. >> i'll second. >> okay. we've got a motion and a second. vice-chair reiner. >> are you done? >> oh, i'm sorry. >> i did want to get district 5 into compliance as well. >> go ahead. >> i think if we're going to make -- we can lossen that post street border. we can start over
so the block on the eastside of van ness in district 6. oh, no, that's octavia. one street further north, that's 100 van ness and 50 van ness. >> excuse me. speak up a little bit. >> the one on polk and hain. that's my proposal. we move -- >> i accept that amendment. >> we're jumping in so fast. we've skipped over vice-chair, if you all remember. >> oh, sorry.
>> it's okay. they're working in tandem. >> i wanted to make a statement because i'm not sure i'm going to be here to make it. we keep talking about not doing things because we haven't heard enough about people telling us and i haven't heard people telling us they want russian hill moved and i'm not saying i object to it if it's done right and if it's the right thing, but i've talked to some russian people since this was sprung on us and nobody talked about it, nobody brought it up, nobody said, we have a coy here and let's see what would happen. the only thing all of us said in russian hill was gone. and i think that i reacted because i wasn't prepared for it. and i think russian hill residents reacted because they weren't prepared for it. and i don't think it's fair. i think if we have to do that, we have to do it in a thoughtful manner.
and we've talked to, i've had one person call me from russian hill who said if that's what we have to do to make this city whole or make this area whole, i'm willing to talk about it but i don't want you to just decide where the boundaries are that are different than what russian hill people decide on, so be sensitive. they talk about chestnut street to haight at the bottom. they would be willing to do that. reinvestigate and look at the coy they have, if you're going to do that, make sure you do it in a thoughtful manner because just deciding on what you're going to do is no different than all the other people who have come here and talked to us and now we're having a really hard time splitting them or moving them because we didn't really pay attention, so that's my caution and that's my request. s- that you pay attention and you treat russian hill with the respect
that they deserve. >> guest 2. >> thank you for that, vice-chair reiner. that was something i was going to bring up. this question with russian hill. i spoke with one person and tried to find out the boundaries and they did acknowledge, i guess the diversity of opinions on where the boundary is. they were all very clear, kind of like van ness was a clear line but out farther east it was less clear. so, i think we do need to acknowledge that time is upon us, right and we do have a couple of coy's right, that we can look at. we also have a couple of recognized
neighborhoods, right. so, i think that, what i propose, i think we can reconcile that. it's to look at -- basically the equity analysis that has been done by the city, to be able to determine the areas that are at risk and with that, we could proceed with some confidence that at least there's a justifiable systematic way of not diminishing or diluting the fair and effective power of representation in china town or north asian. >> vice-chair. >> i wanted to mention that almost everybody i spoke to said broadway was too far south. they felt it was more like green or union to chestnut. it's not as big of an area as everybody grabbed and they were talking about, they did not want to go
down haight for? -- for some reason. haight is a touch street. larkon is tough. i'm clearing on the north and south. and that's the desire. >> mr. castillon. >> thank you. i do just want to bring up that we received hundreds of letters that were hand delivered to us from china town residents, 1100. >> to do what? >> that they wanted to be russian hill and i don't think we is this take it lightly and we should weigh that pretty extensively. >> i know. >> it's not my turn to talk yet, but i talked to three people from russian hill that have met with me. the leaders of a couple
of community organizations, pacific avenue and russian hill neighbors and they wanted to be in three. that was what i heard from them. but anyway. go ahead. have i somethings to say, but i'll get to it. is that you? >> thank you, yeah. if we can pull up all of the russian hill coy's. what could be a better plural than coy. it sounds greek, but russian hill and i apologize, the neighborhood associations are -- they have different geographies and they're different from the neighborhood one, so i'm willing to modify my motion and make it van ness, green, jones,
columbus, i think it's a little bit more reasonable and it will actually -- because -- okay. van ness, jones, living worth. that will hopefully be enough. he want to reiterate why we're talking about russian hill and if you're just joining us, it feels like a random choice. map four d does something that's important that keeps tenderloin and west selma whole. but in order to do that, a lot of other things have to happen because it's a tight map in terms of the numbers and you would have to move the east cut to three and only way to do that is, the it's the only way to do that while keeping mission bay whole which
was something discussed and we have to move russian hill to district 2. it's all the possible options to keep -- tenderloin and western central selma is a huge area and we have limited options on how we handle that area and we have looked at a lot of them and the only -- i still think the other option is something with moving, from d2 to d3. van ness, union, living worth, columbus, sorry, van ness, union, jones, columbus, living worth, water. thank you. >> commissioner chair lee and vice-chair reiner. >> i just want to pushback on the 1100 letters that we supposedly received from china town residents. i took a picture of one of the letters and i actually skimmed through them.
there were several, first off, folks that were not from china town. this one right now, as i'm looking at it, it's from my chan who's address is on geneva. that's not near china town. there's several statements made on the addition, so if -- it says china town fishermans warf and they're tied by small businesses and these should be included in an updated district 3. that's one point. in bold under it, it says i'm against the proposal to add tenderloin to district 3. combining them, combining area with china town will stretch the district and strain resources allowed toward neighborhoods of revitalization and small business effort. i want to point out, there multiple statements on this and
it's not quite clear what, which one -- if they agree with one of them or both of them, yeah. >> vice-chair. >> let me just say just because the person's address isn't in china town, it doesn't mean they don't have a business in china town, they have family in china or they don't have an interest in chinese that town and i have a couple of hundred e-mails in my inbox, probably more than that, from people who support the d10 or something or some other thing and it's a form letter that has been written over and over and over again. so, i think it means that people care. it means that people took the time to send that many and put that many together. i mean, we've had people campaigning for everything here. so, i think it's fair that people say they don't want to be separated and i, to me, that area is very
contiguous. and i'm just, you know, i'm still blown away that all of a sudden russian hill became this thing to move it over without -- without as much conversation we've had, so i'll leave it right there. >> thank you. i have ms. lily ho, sorry. >> about the 1100 letters, jeremy lee, there were two versions of letters you saw and that was one of them. it sounds like that was addressing specifically a proposal to combine china town with tenderloin. right. there was a proposal there and some of our callers still today are talking about uniting the after rose together so that's valid. again, i copy vice-chair reiner's point. a lot of callers that
called in say i live in this district but consider that my coy so i refute that as a valid argument for disregarding those letters. the more important point that i want to make about those letters is this is a disenfranchised community. we have talked about this from day one, people who live or work in the -- the communities that are outreach consultants and they were unable to penetrate and community lead these in china town went door-to-door clicking hand signatures and having conversations with people before people signed their names on something. that's so much morula bore yours and meaningful than item -- than item plat e-mail
and i'm blown away that they galvanize a community and delivered 1100 letters from a community we wouldn't otherwise hear from and i'm just so proud of that. proud of them for making that happen in a short amount of time. additionally, the china town community was, endorsing that map from van ness with the -- chinese companies and they represent the neighborhood associations that represent the oldest communities of the united states, really. definitely california and san francisco that's still intact and work together. so, like, that endorsement alone speaks for the majority of the chinese community in san francisco, not just china town. >> okay. hernandez gil.
>> i want to bring up the fact in the procedure we've adopted, right, we didn't come up with a way to reconcile conflicting opinions, right. and -- [sirens] >> we have heard from residents and people in china town that they don't feel that affinity with russian hill and i think that is important and that is corroborated by concrete data both from the city, from academic that distinguish neighborhoods that are stable and that's great for them, right, verses neighborhoods that are not. i think for me, what i would love to see is having that systematic way of saying, okay,
well, we hear some people, perhaps you get a majority of people saying they want to be with russian hill. right. there's another group of folks that say, well, you know, we don't feel that affinity. and we recognize that the numbers, again, this question of wealth and vulnerability is different. i also think it is as important to consider the fact if we move in that direction, we are excluding the ability of district three to absorb any of the growth that district six has experienced. and i don't really think that that is very justifiable because again, it creates this situation where we're only forced to go in one direction and if you look at the map where the growth has happened and it has happened in a lot of places in district 6 of what is now currently district
6, so i think that it is important to take that into account. and i think, it appears like we're basically moving in the direction of just defacto accepting the d3 united map. i think that's regretful because we have the opportunity to make russian hill whole at least one version of it. right. that's great. they're currently split, let's make them whole. we have heard from them that they're maybe not super excited but willing to be in d2 and they have relationships because they have been split. one would imagine they have relationships so again, i come back to how we go about reconciling different opinions and to me, it's pretty clear that we have an opportunity to make a neighborhood whole, great. and we have an opportunity to distribute some of the growth in a way that benefits a lot of people.
>> very good. mr. jeremy lee. >> if i may respond to member ho. you know, first off, by no means do you want to diminish the work of the chinese merchant association. i fully recognize they did the leg work and they went out to merchants and residents and collected signatures but by no way do i ever want to diminish that. i want to pushback against this narrative that everyone in china town is united for the d3 united map. so, there's several organizations that have not signed on, so forgive me if i state one if i'm wrong and please correct me, but the asian cause cuss and china town, development center and east medical center and chinese naez hospital and help for the elderly and mico and also the
chinese historical society of america which pulled out from the letter so i wanted to illustrate that, china town is fully united behind this particular map. therefore a diversity of opinions on how d3 should look like for china town, thank you. >> okay. guest 1 is who? ms. ho. >> thank you. i wanted to remind us that we've seen a version where d3 -- it breaks up d6 a part. in this version of d3 map, we're respecting at this .21 and perhaps even more organizations in district 3 who say we want to hang out together. we want to stay
together and i feel like a broken record but i see district 3 similarly to district 11 where there hasn't been too much opposing opinions around it. they're not fighting over pieces of, you know, japan town for example. they're not fighting for something else. for the most part, they want to stay together. maybe one edge of the city doesn't feel in align with the other edge of the city but for the most part, there's no opposition to them uniting. and then of course, i would love for there to be absorption but we can't do it without heating the east cut community that has really been fighting for their communities to stay together. that's all, thank you.
>> thank you. guest 2. >> that would be me, thank you, mr. chair. i rescind my motion. it looks like we are deep into line drawing and i am now digging in for 3:00 a.m. so let's go at it. >> mr. jeremy lee. >> thank you. so, one odd thing that i'm not a particular fan of in this 3ba map is it really doesn't include any affordable housing for china town residents. there's 350 sro families considered homeless because they're certificate rearly underhoused by the -- because they're underhoused by the city and the housing sites that are here in this district,
there's two. there's 88 broadway and new asia developing soon. there's not a good fact way for the very impoverished families to get out of their situation, like, for example, one of the dreading factor behind me voting in support of moving treasure island into d three and treasure island will be getting affordable housing and i wanted the residents, the seniors and sro family in china town to there a pathway out and to house accessible living standards. thank you. >> thank you. vice-chair reiner. >> i just want to bring us back to your proposal. i think what we're doing is exactly what we did the other night and we're starting to move into a direction where we're not going to have -- i see us going down
the same path, recreating exactly what we did with four d. we're hearing about the treasure island. we're hearing about russian hill. we really got to stop doing this because we had something that looked like we could work -- work with and we took it off the rails so i like your proposal. i don't think i can do another 3:00 and we're going right around that statement circle, so can we go back to where we were, can we take that map, can we say we're going to work from that, adopt it and then call it a night and then work on it tomorrow? >> mr. chasel lee, i have something to say, but let him go first. >> i have no problem with what you're saying and i think you're absolutely right but i'm the chair and i get to speak last
and everybody gets to say what they want to stay. i know your mind is made up anyway, but i still do because we're not the only ones hear listening so i'm going to stay what i have to say. and then you all can go ahead. and i know even though i'm saying it, i'm saying it because i need to and i need to say it for record because i know it's not anything you want to hear. we've been talking tonight about emerging communities. i'm really concerned with dingling communities and we haven't -- with dwindling communities and we haven't talked about that since we have been here since september and i kept trying to bring it up but it doesn't resonate with anyone and i talked about the dwindling populations of african american in bay views hunters point and i know people right now in the audience, on the phone are saying, there he goes again. yeah, because there we go again. another one just left the city.
and another one is leaving tomorrow. and two are leaving the next day. the only population -- the only populations in san francisco that has lost population. and somehow that's not an emergency with this task force or most of the people that have testified to us except for black people or they mention black people but nobody comes with a coy or solution to try to deal with it. they just -- they just let it go on. it's amazing because when we talk about voter on voter community, 50 to $60,000 is not much money in san francisco. try 29 that the average african american family in san francisco
lives on and people don't think that's important to try to deal with, to give them a situation where they would have influence in their community. and there are enough coy -- community of interest between folk to make it work if we cared enough to make it work but when i bring it up, y'all want to sue me. and we've gotten nowhere in terms of what we've tried to do with the african american community. when we started this process, i was excited. a month or two in, i just say, well, maybe it won't get worse. and at this point, i'm pretty sure that i've failed in that task as well. there will be no real change. there will be
no real improvement. and what is happening to -- to that community will continue to happen. and i love y'all. i think and i think -- when it comes to what's happening to us, i don't think y'all care much. i don't know why. but i just don't think to. because i haven't seen it and i haven't seen except for the black people, i haven't seen it from the public. nobody talks about anything we could do. they just throw the words out there because it makes their argument stronger to say african americans but they're not -- never mind. i'm wasting y'all's time and certainly wasting my own but i think people need to be able to have an effect on
their elected representatives and when you have elected representatives that know they can win without even campaigning 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, you are. >> 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
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 issues coming up that you're cutting other communities but you're afraid to talk about district 2, 3, 4 and 7. and you know, it's very noted. it's very noted and you know, of course district 1, it has the largest amount of tenants. but district 2 has homeowners tenants but they haven't really built a lot or developed a lot and you give them more in district 5 to dilute the rest of the japanese and black community and you're diluting the -- the transgender in district 6 but nothing for