May kaugnayan Elections Commission

Elections Commission Regular Meeting

Wednesday, June 28, 2023

In this page:

    Overview

    Meeting YouTube video and transcript linked at the bottom of this page.

    Agenda

    1. Call to Order and Roll Call

      A member of the Commission will state the following (from the adopted 10/19/22 Elections Commission Land Acknowledgment Resolution):

      The San Francisco Elections Commission acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the Ramaytush Ohlone, who are the original inhabitants of the San Francisco Peninsula.  As the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the Ramaytush Ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory.  As guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland.  We wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors and relatives of the Ramaytush Community and affirming their sovereign rights as First Peoples.

    2. General Public Comment

      Public comment on any issue within the Elections Commission’s general jurisdiction that is not covered by another item on this agenda.

    3. Approval of June 28 Meeting Minutes

      Discussion and possible action on previous Elections Commission meeting minutes.

      Attachment: June 28, 2023 Final Minutes.

    4. Director’s Report

      Discussion and possible action regarding the May 2023 Director’s Report.

      Attachment: June 2023 Director’s Report.

    5. Commissioners’ Reports

      Discussion and possible action on Commissioners’ reports for topics not covered by another item on this agenda: Meetings with public officials; oversight and observation activities; long-range planning for Commission activities and areas of study; proposed legislation which affects elections; others.

      Attachments: 

    6. Fair, Independent, and Effective Redistricting for Community Engagement Committee Updates

      Discussion and possible action on updates from the May and June convenings of the Commission’s temporary Fair, Independent, and Effective Redistricting for Community Engagement Committee.

      Attachments: AB 1248 text; AB 1248 - 6/16/23 Senate Elections Analysis; AB 764 text; AB 764 - 5/24/23 Assembly Floor Analysis.

    7. Closed Session

      Discussion and possible action regarding the annual performance evaluation of John Arntz, the Director of Elections.

        1. Public comment on all matters pertaining to this agenda item, including whether to meet in closed session. 
        2. Vote on whether to meet in closed session to consider this agenda item pursuant to California Government Code§54957(b) and San Francisco Administrative Code§67.10(b). (Action) 
        3. CLOSED SESSION. Closed Session is held pursuant to Brown Act section 54957(b) and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.10(b) to discuss the performance evaluation of a public employee. (Discussion and possible action) 
        4. If closed session is held, reconvene in open session. 
        5. Discussion and vote pursuant to Sunshine Ordinance section 67.12(a) on whether to disclose any portion of the closed session discussion regarding the public employee performance evaluation. (Action) 
        6. Disclosure of action taken, if any, that must be disclosed pursuant to Brown Act section 54957.1 and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.12(b).
    8. Agenda Items for Future Meetings

      Discussion and possible action regarding items for future agendas.

    9. Adjournment

      There will be an opportunity for public comment on each agenda item.

    Date & Time

    Wednesday, June 28, 2023
    6:00 pm to 9:00 pm

    City Hall Room 416

    1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
    San Francisco, CA 94102
    View location on google maps

    Online

    Event number: 2483 896 3154
    Email address: sf@example.com
    Event password: Pt9wtppi5R5 (use 78998774 from phones)
    Join the meeting

    Phone

    Access code: 2483 896 3154
    Event password: 78998774 (for phones only)

    Elections Commission June 28, 2023 Monthly Meeting 20230629 0144 1 1

    Transcript:

    want provide members of the public a brief update um it appears that there are some

    updates to webinar the WebEx webinar system and so we apologize for all the

    back and forth and the waiting what we've decided to do is post the panelist

    password on the website um and so it is not yet up there it will

    be up there momentarily and you will be able to use the past panelist password

    to access the webinar and um at that time you can write a post a

    comment in the chat asking to make public comment you will not be able to

    unmute yourself secretary Davis will unmute you when it is your time and call

    in your name accordingly but please stand by for just a couple more minutes while we put that past word on the

    website it will mean that if you are attending virtually you will have to

    likely sign out and then sign back in with the appropriate panelist password so I'll repeat all of this just bear

    with us for a couple more minutes we do apologize for the change but we want to make sure that we've got you all the

    access you need okay that's right okay sounds a refresh

    okay for folks who would like to make public comment by using the panelist

    password it is now available on the SF excuse me on the elections commission

    website on our meeting page we'll give everyone just a moment to be able to

    access that sign out of the webinar and then join back as a panelist so that you

    can um so that we can Elevate you accordingly for public comments so we'll just give it about about one more minute

    and then we'll go back to agenda item number four for public comment we'll

    close out agenda item number four and then we'll go back to agenda item number two for general public comment

    foreign

    um within the agenda I mean just convinced yeah

    women just like Circle okay for members of the public the one caveat with the troubleshooting the the solution that we

    have come to is that you will have to provide an email address um we can

    we can you may be able to use a dummy email if

    you'd like to remain anonymous otherwise we do

    we may have to um just ask that you provide your comment

    via email otherwise because we do need to continue to move forward

    yes I think I think she's going to have to add another new mattresses same

    company this is but it's and if you do Maurice's email

    address but it has to be through this

    it's fine I don't have access to the idea

    I can't configure the connection here

    okay thank you everyone for your patience and

    we do apologize for still continuing to try and fix this for you

    foreign

    this channel is compared to the media configuration and sir

    I mean yeah so why don't we do like could be like we got one that yeah

    oh so just I mean I was thinking we could just have like

    you know SFS

    oh I don't why don't we pick Easter roads folks wonderful

    marriage here like right just a bit of Justice

    and so on a great thing list and then just confident

    so before I need to talk that they need to be able to provide an email address

    fine we're gonna see if this works go back to the webinar income

    and then in other words whether a dummy one works well yeah I did create one a

    talking one myself for that example my current I mean it should work then right I mean

    WebEx doesn't care if it's a real email yeah

    can you go back to the public

    but people form right there yeah or exit out of the chat

    stand on tech support today I guess go back home the problem is it's

    very hard for them to fix things in real time but it's also set up correctly

    okay

    all right great if um so we just need folks

    I have no idea

    I just assuming more more than the dummy can use more than once so attention I'll

    just update the web series option

    so let's see

    thinking more than one person leaves the dummy email though I think so because I've worked on Choice become

    commissioning us oh okay let's let's meet that member

    difference

    okay so somebody called in okay perfect okay

    so just to give everyone yet another update uh you if you would like to make

    public comment you may use the panelist password that

    is currently listed on the elections commission website next to the agenda

    item on agenda on today's meeting there is a dummy email address

    uh that is SF example.com and you may use that to log in and uh secretary

    Davis will uh call on you when you are

    um when it is your turn to speak okay we appear to have a call in

    wonderful and I'm going to unmute now it is uh just by a phone number so I am

    unsure of the attendees name um

    okay so I'm gonna give I'm going to unmute and give you three minutes

    two three eight are the first three numbers after four one five and here we

    go foreign

    yes we can hear you oh can you hear me yes yes we can hear

    you oh uh John say with illegal one voters San Francisco

    um I I wasn't able to log in through the um

    password that was given for the wood ducks this is what the call-in works

    thank you very much so I suppose then for the purposes of

    moving forward with public comment please use the dial-in going forward

    oh but the only issue is that um it's on the website on the web page

    number that's under online in the parentheses a seven

    eight number instead of the five five eight number that's listed on the phone

    if that makes sense yes thank you very much we are fixing that now we really appreciate your input

    and we really appreciate everyone's patience and we especially appreciate secretary Davis's efforts to rectify all

    of our Tech issues

    okay do you um you still have a minute left do you have any public comment other than the tech issues

    oh no I I didn't raise my hand for the um for the agenda item s

    back on the uh the phone situation okay we appreciate that

    okay thank you the password has been updated accordingly

    so please just refresh the page okay let's go back to public comment there is is there an additional public comment

    yes we have an additional public comment um here um I'm going to unmute Mike Stone

    and you'll have three benefits that's my partner he's not making moving on it

    then we have no emails and no um a dedicated support

    no people have turned up as a panelists other than our original investor Turner

    we sent him please put his email Mr Turner if you'd like to make public comment it appears that the dial-in

    might be a better alternative

    I think let's wait to give him an opportunity to give blood comments easy I wanted to

    but then we should move on yes

    yes okay but one more minute and then we'll move forward

    now the link to the join the meeting takes you to a page that does not know allow you to enter a password

    potatoes okay

    um we're going to close out agenda item number four for members of the public who did not have the opportunity to provide public comment

    um please accept my apologies that this has been so challenging um it is not for a lack of effort I can

    assure you by everyone in this room we really want to ensure you have that opportunity if you had wanted to make it

    weren't able to please don't hesitate to email us again it is elections.commission at sfgov.org and we

    will ensure that it is included and that the members of the commission all have

    access to your comments so with that we're going to close out agenda item number four we are going to go back to

    agenda item number two and retake general public comment um on any issue within our jurisdiction

    that is not covered by another item on this agenda secretary Davis can you let me know if

    there are any public commenters we emailed uh one person trying to chat

    and they would have to log off and log back on as a panelist but there are no comments in the comment

    other than um people not being able to raise their

    hand and no other panelists are on except for

    the ones that we already acknowledged I'm also happy to read out my own personal uh my sfgov email which is

    Robin Robin dot Stone s-t-o-n-e sfgov.org if you would like to submit

    your public comment that way as well

    okay I think we should close out agenda item number two and move to agenda item

    number five uh Commissioners reports discussion and possible action on Commissioners reports for topics not

    covered by another item on this agenda meetings with public officials oversight and observation activities long-range

    planning for commission activities and areas of study proposed legislation which affect elections and others

    Commissioners I will open this up does anyone have a report they would like to share

    vice president jordanick yes so I have um five things to report

    so the um the US Department of state has an exchange program it's called the

    international visitor leadership program and they reached out to president Stone and invited a few people to

    speak to a number of international visitors who were observing elections in San Francisco

    and they're mostly from Central and South America so um president Stone couldn't attend but I

    I attended and I I spoke to them for about an hour this was a few weeks ago and just kind of answered questions just

    gave them an overview of how elections pure work and secondly I've noticed a few bugs in

    the USF the new commission's new website and the these are things that affect all

    the different commissions websites not just ours so I've been letting Digital Services know about those issues

    and so they're going to be working on fixing some of them like one of the issues is that meetings don't show up as

    canceled so um that's um just something else

    um thirdly this is something that director Ernst also mentioned but Digital Services let

    me know that they're going to be rolling out a new method of um archiving The Old website and that's so

    that we're not going to have to go back to the internet archives website it should be a smoother experience and um

    that's going to be rolled out over the next I think six months but we might we might get to try it within the next few

    months or so um I also wanted to just let people know I'm I'm still working on the annual

    report and I'm just finding time to do that this summer and then the last two things are I

    attached two memos to the packet today the first memo is related to a letter

    that the commission sent to the Secretary of State back in January 2022

    and it was a letter about a report on some vulnerabilities and dominions

    voting system that was written in the context about court case in Georgia and this is a

    report that was written by Dr Holderman who was also a guest at one of our meetings this year in February

    and at the time back in January 2022 that report had not been made public so

    um uh we were encouraged to um

    contact the Secretary of State to find out if at least we could be learn about the contents of that report

    so president bernholz wrote the letter for us after we authorized her

    um but so the news is that just a couple weeks ago that report has finally been made public and my memo um

    you know provides the link to the report and also a blog post that Dr Halterman wrote about it

    and the last thing I want to mention is it's the second memo that I wrote which was about the um

    the ordinance that is before the Board of Supervisors to opt out of ab1416

    and I just wanted to share some information I learned about the ordinance

    and also some materials that director Arns shared with the committee and for example there's a mock-up of of

    what the ballot looks like with the labels that I don't think we've seen before and also I learned

    from an article I found online how some of the other counties are handling the situation I know it seems like some of

    the larger counties like la Orange County and um Santa Clara are all

    staying opted into London the um the state bill

    um and just the last I I do think it would have been

    nice if we had had a chance to discuss the ordinance before it was introduced because I think there are some

    Alternatives we could have explored and talked about it but it's kind of too late now but I just

    wanted to at least share the information that I I found thank you

    thank you vice president jordanick commissioner die

    uh yeah I was just gonna say commissioner jordanick that I found the uh the report Dr halderman's

    report very disturbing in terms of what's what's happening in in Georgia

    and the fact that the software is not going to be updated of course director aren't sweet here in

    San Francisco has have kept our software updated I'm sure right for the image cast

    I'm sorry what was the question so if if you had a chance to read the I

    have not yeah uh one of the comments in Dr halderman's report uh blog post about

    it was that the uh secretary raffensberger had announced that Georgia

    would not update update the Dominion uh software

    uh until after the 2024 presidential election even though there were all these vulnerabilities that were found

    yeah I hadn't read the report but the Georgia the the Georgia equipment and

    software is not the same as what we're using San Francisco so it's not a true comparison of systems but I have to read

    the report I I don't want to go into this any deeper than than that comment so right but it's our I'm sure it's our

    your Department's policy that we would update software when there's a security vulnerability and it's pushed out by the

    company we would we would update it right well yeah the updates go through

    Secretary of State's office okay and so if the Dominion has an update for its system even if it was specific to a

    county and we've had that San Francisco in relation to ranked Choice voting uh even even the county specific upgrade

    would have to go after Secretary of State's office for review and approval uh and then once it was approved then we

    could make the upgrade got it uh and I guess my other comment on

    commissioner jordanick on on ab1416 there's some astonishing

    percentage of Voters who don't read anything until they're actually in the

    actually voting I don't know if anyone knows what that percentage is but it's pretty high that

    percentage of Voters who don't read anything in advance but they go and they vote and they read there so I think that

    was the intent of ab1416 is to catch those voters that that don't read the

    voter information pathway especially ours which is extremely long so um I do think that's something that

    uh you know if we could save a million dollars from printing the extra ballot

    card I mean I'd rather see that that information is available to people there

    and save the money on the printing at the voter information pamphlet which I suspect a lot of people don't actually

    open so point of clarification uh commissioner die I just want to make

    sure I understood what you were saying because I I yeah I want to make sure you're saying I understood what you're saying are you saying

    that the cost you see benefit in a cost-saving measure being putting the

    opponents and proponents on the card and not in the voter information packet

    I'm not saying that we shouldn't put the information the voter information packet what I'm saying is we've been talking

    about going green in the campaign that uh the Department of Elections is running and how much we would say by not

    printing so many voter information pathlants of course we'd want to print a minimum number

    get them out to the library and and the people who who actually read

    it but I suspect there's a large percentage of people they immediately toss it and for those people

    you know who only look at look at the question when they're actually voting on it those that information will be very

    valuable to them so I was just saying that that would be a better trade-off to to catch those folks

    so that's something that we might consider in the future as commissioner jordanick pointed out most

    of the large Counties have opted in um I know in San Francisco from what we

    heard from director Arts it creates a number of issues with that extra ballot card

    including our sorting equipment and everything else so it's it's it is a cost big cost to us but

    um we don't want to um do you know save money at the expense of

    making sure that our voters are informed thank you for clarifying

    just have a quick fun item as most of you know I spent three weeks

    in Cambridge at uh Harvard Kennedy School uh attending their senior

    Executives in state and local government program and that was um a fabulous program

    uh it's I attended with 51 other public officials from all over the nation and a

    few countries we had three Australians and uh one person from Ireland

    uh very diverse group of officials for example the five of us from California included uh one of um Anna and Jamie's

    colleagues in the city attorney's office uh me as an election commissioner I was the only elections commissioner out of

    the 52 people a librarian from Hayward uh the elected D.A from Monterey County

    and the new police chief from the city of Mountain View so very incredibly

    diverse cohort uh and we studied everything from policy modeling to

    climate change to State and local Finance community policing it was

    incredible uh very intense ruling program for three weeks but I highly

    recommend it there is a special Fellowship that both Luis Zamora and I

    from San Francisco received that fund Bay Area San Francisco Bay Area Public

    officials in particular so happy to share that information with anyone else

    if you're interested I did immediately get a question about whether I would support compulsory voting because they

    have compulsory voting in Australia and so that was like the first discussion that we had during introduction so you

    can just imagine how um amazing the conversations were so anyway

    just wanted to to share that and there were a lot of tools that we learned that

    I hope to put to use in my work on this Commission

    thank you commissioner die commissioner Hayden Crowley um is it okay for me to just address the

    change of date that we have because I was not here for the last 25 minutes of the last meeting can I just talk about

    that briefly absolutely I was also going to talk about it in my report please go for it okay thank you um with deference

    to you commissioner die I'm certainly happy that you had a educational and informative trip that we're all learning

    from um I just would like to go on record as I did at the beginning of last meeting and at the previous meeting or two

    meetings where commissioner levolsi indicated she could not attend the previous meeting when we have scheduled

    meetings at the beginning of the year I feel very strongly that we need to commit to them and stay on the calendar

    people all everybody has different commitments that come up it is okay to

    miss a meeting no matter how important your agenda item is and as you can see tonight

    commissioner Parker is in here and I'm not sure if she would have been able to attend the meeting had it been at the

    regularly scheduled time but this meeting tonight is coming up on the 4th of July weekend where many people are

    gone it's not the most convenient the exceptions that I would uh um support

    would be around the Christmas and Thanksgiving holiday to move around that

    but otherwise we publish a calendar and I think it's in the Public's interest to adhere to that calendar and respect the

    public in that I would just say personally I did leave the meeting a

    half hour early last week last time because I had a commitment the next day I had moved a vacation that when I was

    appointed to this commission I take my roles seriously and I paid a lot of

    money to move that vacation and make sure that I attended the meeting and did not ask this group to change the meeting

    date to accommodate me so while I'm I support what you just your

    participation in the fellowship I do not believe that this commission should um

    port a policy where we are changing our meeting dates because I don't believe it's in the best interest of the public

    and after all I don't believe the Board of Supervisors does that so for their meeting dates and that would be the a

    precedent that we would follow so thank you thank you commissioner Hayden Crowley

    um Commissioners levolsi and bernhulse want to give you an opportunity to provide any reports should you have

    anything no okay I don't see Henry's friend commissioner burnhall's

    um I just had a few updates and then I will also provide yet another update on

    our Tech issues or solves so I wanted to give a couple of updates

    I'll speak to the policy about moving meetings in a moment but first I wanted to just share

    that uh secretary Davis and I have been going through some very old file

    cabinets for the elections commission that includes a lot of old meeting

    documents from the last 20 plus years uh and so that is a a process that we're

    going to be continuing to work on there's a lot of interesting material in there um but I wanted to just let everyone

    know that we are going through those if people have specific interests in certain materials let us know there is

    all kinds of stuff in there that we've only just be done to scratch the surface around but hopefully at some point and

    not necessarily this year but maybe in a future budget cycle we could propose trying to digitize some of those records

    one of the things that you know I've mentioned uh as uh uh um

    in this role in the last year is that I think providing the public with insight

    into the history of the commission and what we've done what we've accomplished um also why we were established I think

    there's a lot of value in providing more access to that information some of which

    is in those documents and so I just wanted folks to be aware that that is a project that is being currently worked

    on and may take some time but um for whomever maybe the president in

    the next budget cycle it's something I think we should continue to consider in terms of digitizing some of those

    records and getting them on our website uh that's just kind of a brief update

    the second update I wanted to talk about was around the policies as I did receive some feedback and I wanted to give some

    transparency with folks about how I in the last and let's see six months have been approaching moving our meetings or

    requests to move meetings uh for the um just for general knowledge everyone

    being on the same page and also having a little bit of a discussion around it so

    I Echo commissioner Hayden Crowley's sentiment that you know there are things

    in our personal lives we all have very busy lives uh and it's okay to miss

    meetings every once in a while um but the general process that I have followed is to restate some of that

    which is you know it's okay to miss every once in a while giving a heads up it's important to be consistent for the

    public obviously we do have an established meeting date at the third

    Wednesday of every month in the same room at the same time time that we do try and follow that at the worst case

    scenario if folks feel strongly about participating um in the meeting and want to consider

    moving the meeting I have suggested that those folks who are requesting that ask

    present it to the full body during the appropriate agenda item and

    so um that has been the way we have done it I think there have been a couple of times where we haven't moved the meeting

    in the last six months this past time there was a general consensus I think we

    could evolve these policies or this policy rather but I wanted to give folks

    a transparency into what that policy has been over the last six months for everyone not just commission or die

    um and B I welcome feedback whether it's here or via email about that process the

    policy and we can continue to talk about it should should that be of issue so I

    will open that up um for discussion in just a minute the last Quick uh report I wanted to provide

    which is actually related which is that we are going to have our regular meeting for July at our usual day uh third

    Wednesday of the month in the same room we are not having our August regular meeting

    um we are um we will be doing a retreat off-site details to come on that and then the one

    other big update that I have shared um that I'd like to share with everyone is that we will be around the holidays

    specifically is that the November meeting will remain the same on Wednesday November 15th but the December

    meeting has been moved to Tuesday December 12th at 6 PM in room 400. that

    will obviously be updated on the website but we did want to get ahead of scheduling a a meeting room for that

    we've given that folks may be wanting to travel for some of the observed holidays

    those are my updates I do welcome discussion about the policy or any other

    questions I have so I will open the floor to other Commissioners for their

    feedback

    commissioner die yeah I just want to say that commissioner Parker was very apologetic because she had originally

    said that she could make the state and there was a last minute you know trip so she apologized for having to miss it but

    originally all seven of us of us could make it

    okay if there are no further comments I think what we'll do as it pertains to the policy is should this come up again

    let's just um or some someone reaches out with this request and it becomes a full uh

    conversation of the body again let's revisit this policy if it should be an issue I do Echo commissioner Hayden

    Crowley sentiment that consistency with the public is imperative so

    vice president trotonic yeah thank you for your report president I just had a question about the

    you know the the all papers are going through are they how far back do they go it's the oldest one to the first year or

    is it more more recent than that uh this is President Stone the they're quite old

    um from almost the establishment of the body there are quite a few documents um

    that I actually thought you in particular might be interested in so okay great also just another point of

    information is I think at one point in our history shortly after I joined I think the

    commission secretary sent a number of documents to the city's archive so there could even be more but I don't know how

    how one can obtain those as well but something else to think about

    thank you vice president jordanick I appreciate that and we'll look into that uh commissioner levelsi this is commissioner volsi I have a question

    um when will though there be access to those documents

    you can have access those documents whenever you'd like okay so if I want to look at something I can just reach out

    to you yes okay thank you absolutely no problem should be fun

    okay um with that we'll move to public comment

    with a brief note a update on our ever ending never ending rather struggle

    with tech um but there are a couple of updates one is that um the call-in number we can

    confirm does work so just a quick reminder that for folks who have decided to make join and want to make

    public comment over audio you can use the appropriate call and information listed on the agenda and on the website

    and press star three to raise your hand and secretary Davis will advance you

    um additionally um if you do attempt to join as a

    panelist with that solve that we presented earlier in the meeting

    um you may you may raise your hand as well um and that way

    um so for folks who are we're not at the beginning of the meeting when we were facing these issues you will have to

    join as a panelist the information to do so is listed on our website

    um so you'll have to leave the webinar and rejoin as a panelist you will be able to raise your hand as a panelist

    and then secretary Davis will advance you and call on you when it's your turn but um thank you all so much for your

    patience I really I really appreciate that including the dca's secretary Davis

    vice president jordanick and the Commissioners members of the public everyone for your patience I recognize not ideal we're going to move to public

    comment on agenda item number five Commissioners reports

    I do not see any public comments on issue number five

    okay thank you secretary Davis and for the purposes of uh of access we're going

    to do this one more time we're going to move back to agenda item number two now that we have confirmed that our two

    different workarounds do in fact work let's move back to agenda item number two general public comment on any issue

    within the elections commission's General jurisdiction that is not covered by another item on this agenda

    secretary Davis are there any public commenters for agenda item number two

    no and if you call in as a panelist and raise your hand I may unmute you before

    we recognize you so please stay on the line

    you know comments great the last time we will close out

    agenda item number two and move to agenda item number six fair independent

    and effective redistricting for Community engagement committee updates discussion and possible action on

    updates from the May and June convenings of the commission's temporary Fair independent and effective redistricting

    for Community engagement committee and with that I will hand it to over to commissioner levolsi and commissioner

    die to provide updates on the meeting from earlier this week

    okay so the the fierce committee meant twice on May 31st and again on

    um just this last Monday for about five hours total uh we did have technical issues as well

    uh for both meetings since uh we did not we didn't have any staff and we were our

    own tech support I just wanted to note in the May meeting we had issues with the audio uh room

    audio being heard on the WebEx so we lost about 15 minutes if the

    initial audio uh on the recording but fortunately commissioner Parker figured

    figured out how to fix it before the main agenda item so most of the meeting is there that recording has been posted

    uh in Monday's minute meeting there was an issue with folks on the phone not

    being able to raise their hands uh or at least we weren't able to see them so we

    found out after the meeting that several members of the public had wanted to comment as well as including some

    panelists from our first meeting so apologies to them all I'm not sure how

    we would have resolved the call-in uh saying we were able to take a lot of

    public comment in the room uh and uh and

    I don't think we had any commenters by WebEx uh I thought I would give commissioner levolsi a chance to make some initial

    comments about both of our meetings and and thoughts and then I'm happy to do

    some work thank you commissioner died this is commissioner levolsi

    the meeting on Monday um my my thoughts and Reflections

    um are mainly that this is something that I think would

    allow our redistricting process to be something that would could be less

    um strenuous less um

    harmful to those who participate listening to

    the members of the public who were on past commissions and their feeling of

    feeling that they could not do what they wanted to do that they felt some

    pressure I want to be clear not all of the participants who spoke to us on Monday had that feeling

    um there was a lot to process um there were very engaged members of

    the public who had thoughts and impressions and I will say that it's always

    important and imperative to hear from the public I was somewhat surprised at

    some of the personal attacks but as Commissioners we're aware that that's something that may occur

    I left the meeting with a sense that

    we should pause a bit and see what the current legislation how

    that will play out but I do feel that removing

    political influence from the redistricting process is the best way to

    ensure particularly that um certain marginalized groups in the

    cities who in this city whose population are dwindling are represented and so how

    we do that is the question um a concern I had and that came up and

    there was a discussion with several of the panelists about the vetting

    Authority for applications if we were to go through a process that allowed people

    to apply as members of their

    the supervisory district and that's probably where

    it would be the most difficult who is the authority in the city that the

    community and people in the city would trust to that those applications I know that the city attorney's office has said

    that it would be the San Francisco ethics commission but I'm not sure that

    um does a large trust in that organization

    as well so I left the meeting with a lot of questions and

    concerns as to how we can have a redistricting

    that is removed from political influence but

    that also is fair and representative especially of smaller communities in

    this city and I'm specifically thinking about the African-American and Latino communities

    thank you commissioner volsi I just had a quick point of clarification when you

    said something less strenuous and also vetting those applications are you referring to the state legislation or

    just redistricting in general just so I know I'm I'm following what you're

    tracking with you so I'm thinking in terms of we were to if

    this Board of Supervisors was to write legislation it would be that

    we would have a vetting Agency for members of the public to apply

    and so what agency would the people of San Francisco have confidence

    in so as opposed to how it currently stands where exactly okay thank you for

    clarifying commissioner die yeah so uh let me give you a brief

    overview the uh May 31st meeting uh since it was our first meeting I gave

    a brief history of how the redistricting initiative uh came to be that it was a

    response to a protest in front of City Hall in March of 2022 and that the

    elections commission had been studying these possible reforms for over a year that featured at that first meeting was

    a very diverse panel of good government experts plus the former redistricting

    Task Force member uh so you'll remember these were folks from common cause the League of

    Women Voters of San Francisco Asian Americans advancing justice justice Asian law caucus and then uh

    Chima Hernandez gill who was on our most recent redistricting task force to kind

    of provide the local reality check of what actually happened in the last

    process and the the meeting was designed to help us answer the question of how well

    ab1248 which is pending uh in the Senate right

    now and ab 764 also pending in the Senate would suit San Francisco if it

    passed and we struck all the language in the charter referencing the redistricting task force

    or that we use it as a basis for a charter Amendment and then the second question we were

    trying to answer is what happens if that legislation the state legislation doesn't pass where

    does that leave us so uh the answer to the first question was that there was a pretty good

    consensus among our good government experts that ab1248 would Implement almost all

    of the key reforms that were contained uh in the summary of redistricting reform recommendations that we had

    studied over six months or the latter half of 2022 and in fact

    seatsake offered from the Asian law caucus said that it would probably get us 95 percent of the way

    um would it be helpful if I do a quick overview of of what 1248 would actually

    cover because I went through with a kind of a fine tooth comb um

    is that question direct Mr President John is that question directed at me disconnected at the at the full

    commission would it be helpful for me to quickly review what the provisions are for ab1248 and

    um AB 764 or have you all read it

    vice president well I just have a question are you um are we moving into

    the discussion portion of the item or or are you still reporting on the activities still recording on it I I did

    this overview for the public because I figured not everyone read these bills and details I did a quick summary of

    what the key reforms are and I'm just wondering if it would be beneficial for the commission as well or if you feel

    confident that you've read everything then I'll just move on

    either way whatever other people want to do

    what's your name I'm the same yeah I'm comfortable either way I mean

    I I've read this a lot okay but it doesn't mean that I remember it all

    right let me let me let me be candidate all right that's why I thought it might be helpful to just do a quick review it

    won't take very long um so 12 48 is basically

    um about creating independent redistricting commissions as you know San Francisco has one uh but uh because

    of a clause at the beginning of the bill which states that political appointment of Commissioners has been found to

    create potential conflicts of interest and opportunity for corruption of the redistricting process uh San Francisco's

    redistrict task force would not qualify under this bill and we would be forced to create a different one

    it requires that all these um this replies to all cities counties

    including Charter cities uh it requires reasonable funding and Staffing for the

    Indus for the commission and an open and competitive selection process from a

    large representative pool whose number of applicants and demographics must be

    made public so one of the things that we had talked about early uh early in in

    our redistricting initiative process is the fact that we actually don't even know how many people applied

    um you know it was a black box in terms of how many applicants applied through the mayor the only kind of open

    well we know that there were eight people who applied to the Board of Supervisors and 35 that apply through

    our commissions and there was a large overlap between those so uh and

    demographics were not reported there were minimum qualifications to serve including residency a history of Civic

    engagement the ability to be impartial analytical skills and appreciation of San Francisco's diverse demographics and

    geography we have no qualifications currently for our redistricting task force members

    there are pre-jury and post-service requirements because you don't want people running for the districts that

    they just drew uh they're a conflict of interest checks uh including family

    members so you can't have been a candidate for office a lobbyist a major

    donor anything that would conflict you out from being able to draw a fair and representative districts there is a

    vetting agency that helps select people from this you know large pool of applicants

    and we've heard from the our dcas that the law would say for San Francisco that

    would be the ethics commission and so there was some discussion about whether that would be right for San Francisco

    if we don't create our own separate Charter Amendment a default structure

    would be put in place and this default structure is based totally off of the California citizens redistricting

    commission which has operated twice successfully now 14 members

    plus two alternate so that is the new edition which is a big Improvement eight randomly selected from the 40 most

    qualified applicants that the vetting agency would choose based on that standard criteria uh and those eight would have to come

    from all different districts and then those eight would select the final six to balance out diversity so remember we

    had the discussion about random selection versus uh versus actual

    selection uh and this is something that I had been very concerned about and this

    kind of addresses my concern that we have too many districts and if everybody was you know randomly selected we might not

    have a very diverse commission at all um and then there's also stipulation

    that they can't be from all the same party uh there's a ban on ex parte

    communication so there's no political interference you're not allowed to talk elected officials are not allowed to

    speak with commission members outside of a public meeting there's a minimum of 250 days before the

    deadline when the task force has to be constituted one of the issues in this last cycle is that the redistrative task

    force was constituted pretty late and didn't have enough time to to to do the public input hearings and draw

    the maps uh that was something that our good government panel was a little bit

    concerned about they said that even though that's a minimum that San Francisco is a big complex City and

    probably needs to start a year in advance so they were concerned that that there would be

    um you know that people would ultimate automatically default to the minimum and

    not not take more time and they felt that San Francisco should take more time that and not have a rush process it puts

    in a super majority of nine who have to approve the map so to build consensus and there's actually

    a removal process that the the task force would monitor themselves so people

    wouldn't be protesting in front of City Hall and coming in front of the elections commission to to have us remove them so that's 1248. uh so if you

    look at all these things it hits almost all the elements that we had talked about before and ab 764 strengthens the

    fair Maps act which we as a city were exempt from because we were a charter City we would no longer be exempt from

    from that act if this passes uh this is designed to strengthen the fair Maps act

    it requires a published published education and Outreach plan mapping tools and a public website so that

    members of the public can follow the redistricting process it puts in ranked mapping criteria exactly like the state

    uh it requires increased transparency a five-day notice for meetings seven days

    for the final map and it requires publishing a final report which each of

    our redistricting task forces have done which was not required but they have done it however the this stipulates that

    the report must identify and explain why each neighborhood and or community of

    Interest was split and that was not done and in any of the reports that I've seen it supports that it requires that we

    support hybrid meetings accessibility weekend or evening meetings for more

    accessibility to the public and requires a minimum of two public hearings before

    draft map and seven afterwards and I think most of our redistrict task force

    have actually done more than that but this is setting the minimum bar across the state and finally something that was

    really missing when people came to us is it provides recourse if the commission

    fails to meet the deadline so our redistricting task force missed the deadline they were not alone

    um so in this case it stipulates that it would punt to secure Superior Court

    so in other words if the task force fails the Superior Court would draw the lines instead and they would they could

    hire a special Master to to do that both bills indicate that good local

    redistricting is a matter of State concern so that's why Charter cities would no longer be exempt

    um we did get clarification that San Francisco Unified would not be subject

    to this because they do not have District elections so that's a stipulation

    so that's a brief summary of the two bills and that is what all the good government experts said would get a 70

    sorry 95 of all of the reforms that we've been discussing for the past year

    um uh Mr Gill who served on the past redistry task force noted that he said

    alternates were crucial to have backup plan uh we had some discussion about stipends

    and what would be a regional stipend um for example The Long Beach stipend

    was I think 200 per meeting uh and then

    there was uh no consensus on whether the ethics commission was the

    bright fitting body for San Francisco and so that's something that we would want to ask the Board of Supervisors

    should they draft legislation to get input from the public on uh

    the other thing was that the other question was what happens if if 1248

    doesn't pass and we had struck all the language from the charter and Jen say from the League of Women

    Voters had had opine that it might still be an improvement because San Francisco would

    still fall under the fair Maps act which we didn't fall under before which has

    the rank criteria all the transparency and other key reforms so she thought it would still be better for San Francisco

    although subsequently we did get clarification from our dcas that if San

    Francisco did not pass its own you know Charter Amendment and put its own uh

    independent redistricting Commission in then it means and 1248 did not pass

    forcing that default commission it would mean the Board of Supervisors would be the redistricting body although they

    would have to follow the rank criteria the transparency the community engagement rules all of the fair Maps

    Act however they would still be drawing the lines which my personal opinion is that probably

    would not be acceptable since we've had an independent redistricting body for over 20 years uh

    on the Monday's meeting uh was a very challenging meeting uh there

    were uh as you know we had a lot of form letters that we received prior to the

    meeting we had a lot of people in person who gave public comment uh but we did have a very rich

    discussion because we had in response to comments from the first meeting

    we had sent out a notice to all former redistricting task force members uh

    there have been concerns expressed and the in the letters we received before the first meeting that we had only

    talked to one redistricting Task Force member which as you know all of you know is not true since we had a panel last

    fall we did only have one on the 31st but uh we had spoken to five total

    redistricting task force members previously but we thought it would be a good idea and part of the reason we

    didn't take action after the meeting on the 31st is that we thought it would be useful to get input from from other

    redistricting task force members we had not heard from so I went ahead and gathered all the

    emails I could keep keeping in mind none of them have sfgov emails anymore so we got

    um everyone who served this past cycle almost all of the folks who served in

    2011 and the chair of uh the very first redistricting task force and uh we were

    fortunate enough to have three of them come to our meeting and then as a

    complete bonus I also got Oakland based Russell Yee who's on the 2020 California

    citizens redistricting Commission in one of the rotating chairs to

    also participate via WebEx I know that many of us have said hey why don't we

    hear from the California commission and it's because they were drawing 176 districts they didn't have time to come

    talk to us but now they're writing their own final recommendations report and I was able to get Mr Yi to join us from

    Sacramento he was at a CRC meeting but he took a break and joined us for an hour on a WebEx

    and I asked him how they got a unanimous vote on 176 districts with a

    multi-partisan body a census delay and a global pandemic and he cited three

    things that helped them be successful he said one the impartial impartiality of

    all the Commissioners which is one of the criteria uh the fact that they represented all of

    California and not just work their hometowns uh the other thing was the rank criteria

    which would also be you know it has been put in place for every other jurisdiction except for Charter cities

    uh and then he said adequate Staffing and for those of you who remembered we had testimony from the city clerk that

    Staffing was a real issue for the redistricting task force that they had no control over their own budget or

    staff uh and he actually mentioned that in his hometown of Oakland that their

    independent redistricting commission was three to four months late because of inadequate Staffing he said they had

    like a half-time person like us like the elections commission and that's why they were so far behind

    he also endorsed the use of alternates which of course they don't have at the state level

    and he spent some time in response to a question from commissioner Parker discussing how well the super majority

    requirement worked for them that it really worked to build consensus for them

    uh and then we switched over to our three redistricting task force members we were fortunate to have in person from

    the most recent task force uh Jeremy Lee Who was appointed by the Board of Supervisors Arnold Townsend who was

    chair and appointed by the mayor and then virtually on WebEx the chair of the

    2011 uh redistrative task force Eric McDonald who was also appointed by the Board of Supervisors

    um unfortunately Gwen Craig who is chair of the very first redistricting task force had a home emergency and texted me

    like five minutes before the meeting saying she wasn't going to be able to make it but we do have our own record from the September 2022 meeting

    and you know the the testimony was

    um really disturbing in many ways we heard um from their Mouse stories of of the

    pressure that they were under um Mr Lee talked about how it Amplified you

    know that they not only were getting pressure from their appointing authorities but because everyone from

    that small group of people were pretty much you know political politically

    connected and so they all had connections to people so they were getting pressure from all kinds of

    individuals Reverend Townsend talked about the the focus was drawing safe

    districts uh which is shocking as I I said that's

    basically the definition of gerrymandering but that was the kind of pressure that this this body was under

    um Mr Lee shared at the end uh which was particularly poignant that that he has

    been on two different antidepressants uh since this experience uh because of

    the trauma of being of serving and uh uh I found that disturbing as

    well uh so I would say that

    um and then we had um a little bit of contrast from Mr Mcdonald who had a

    unanimous vote and a relatively uncontentious uh process but basically all three of them talked

    about the importance of of kind of minimizing political

    influence uh so strong support for that from all

    of them strong support for stipend which is a question that had come up uh that that would make it more

    equitable um

    and trying to think what else to highlight from it

    um but uh yeah

    they were undecided on the proper vetting Authority that was something we asked them they're all San franciscans

    like what do they what do they think the right vetting Authority should be and then the question they asked is how is

    the elections commission selected right so they they said that you know we

    need to take into consideration whether there's enough um you know

    whether there's a the elections commission at the the ethics commission uh has political

    influence in the selection and with that taint their vetting ability to vet and be trusted by the public and so that was

    a the question that was asked who appoints them was the question that was asked

    um Reverend Townsend had some really poignant comments about that he was

    threatened for bringing up the African-American community um yeah when he tried to

    um represent them uh as part of this process uh there was discussion of a pretty

    um constant faction that there were five four votes on multiple things uh and

    that it seemed to be um that certain maybe not all but

    certain members of the redistricting task force had come in there with an agenda

    um we did discuss also a little bit about the random selection process

    um but yeah it's um we're working on getting the recording up I actually recommend that everybody listen to it uh

    it was very interesting we had a lot of public comment afterwards and

    and basically after that after hearing the public comment it was interesting

    many of the public commenters said that they had they had you know different ideas after hearing

    the panel which I thought was positive uh the discussion that we had as a committee afterwards was you know

    whether we were ready to take action on it uh and I think uh I'm I'm channeling

    commissioner Parker here that she said it was important that we uh you know

    have the community's trust as we move through this process and that given that

    you know that this legislation is still pending at the state level that it might

    be useful to take a pause and see you know where that goes uh

    so uh so that's kind of where we are right now uh I do agree that while we

    have been on this journey for a year it's very clear that the members of the public who certainly

    showed up at our meeting have not been and also since we switched over to this new website it's hard to find the

    archived footage of of all of the expert testimony that we've had so I think it's

    useful to try to bring people along I mean I think there's genuine interest in

    hearing from all the expert testimony that we that we have been you know listening to for a year uh and you know

    it's all there on our website if you can find it in the archive and so we I think it's incumbent upon us to make that more

    available so that the public can can you know learn uh why we are proposing these

    reforms uh and that it's not um because we want any particular outcome

    that these are structural and process recommendations to remove political

    influence and to insulate the public servants who have

    you know for the last three Cycles have volunteered to uh to do this very important job of

    trying to figure out what you know what districts would provide the best representation for all San franciscans

    and the fact that you know we are basically causing mental illness

    for those who serve um is is really I think a big concern

    and something that we heard uh not only from Mr Mcdonald who chaired the

    relatively smooth 2011 redistricting task force we also heard from Mr Lee Young Lee who also served with him that

    the reason they were successful is that they were left alone men allowed to do their job so uh

    so that's my summary which I will try to write up in minutes

    at some point Thank You commissioner die um does anyone have any bald questions

    or comments or Commissioners revolves C or commissioner

    die vice president Jordan yes so just to confirm there was no

    action taken at either of the meetings well the action was that we decided that uh we needed to take a pause and we want

    to monitor the the status of the state legislation I will say that that it has

    been amended a couple of times and the Amendments have all been good so we moved from

    one of my biggest concerns was that there was random it had previously stipulated random selection for all

    districts which with a 14-member commission would have left only three at large seats which might have resulted in

    a not very diverse commission and so they fixed that so okay I just add to your question

    and answering your question commissioner bullsey yes um the about

    taking action one of the other reasons to pause at this time is to also allow

    the public to get more information and to review and [Music]

    see what information the committee actually brought to the public that was

    also the other reason for pausing yeah thank you commissioner Lebowski vice president Jordan yes so

    um are there so I know you said you wanted to wait and see what happens with the

    legislation but are you um planning on proposing that the commission

    um encouraged the city to take a position on either of the bills or or not or is that undecided well I think

    part of the reason is that it's being amended so the bill is actually literally changing as we speak and so

    um you know uh I think that the committee was hesitant

    to first of all we didn't we didn't explicitly have a discussion about the letter uh because we were mostly focused

    on on getting this uh testimony from the panelists uh that is something we could

    take up at a future committee meeting and we also wanted to open it up to the

    rest of the commission to suggest to us other uh

    you know other topics that you might want us to explore

    uh for example like I said we were it was just lucky that uh

    Mr Lee Mr Yi from the 2020 CRC happened

    to reach out to me because he's one of the final recommendations report authors and

    he wanted to include some information about the 2010 COC and so he happened to

    reach out to me and I said hey would you be able to show up at a meeting next Monday because that is the first time we've had

    a chance to hear from this last uh Statewide commission which faced all the

    same challenges as our redistricting task force with the census delay in the global pandemic and all that so for

    example would it be useful to hear from CRC member Sarah saidwani who is very

    involved with the reform efforts with the city of Los Angeles in fact they just published a report as you recall if

    it were not for Los Angeles San Francisco would be the poster child for what went wrong in the redistricting

    process uh so she unfortunately wasn't available I had asked her to be available and she

    wasn't available on Monday just turned out but might be open to addressing the

    committee uh if there are additional questions that we would want to ask like what we could learn from the state

    process this fast time I'm just throwing that out as as an idea

    we could spend another committee many meeting debating the merits of of uh of

    of moving on that letter like I said we actually didn't have time to actually explicitly discuss the letter and whether to recommend to the

    Commission on whether to take action on it point of order vice president jordanick

    I don't know if you have like a list of questions do you want to run through the list of questions and then we can also hand it back to the Commissioners level

    see and die so that they can just for the purposes of efficiency so we're not doing that like bouncing back and forth

    yeah I do have a list of questions I think maybe four um okay if you don't mind just for the

    purposes of moving the meeting along sure so um one question is what is the time

    frame for taking a position on the state legislation um related to that

    you mentioned that the legislation is undergoing a lot of amendments and my my point is that the point I want to make

    is that you can also be supportive of the broad Strokes of legislation even if you don't know the

    exact details um the third question is when you say

    taking a pause just to clarify do you mean that the committee is going to stop meeting for a while or do you just mean

    that you're going to take a pause and taking any positions but the committee would

    continue to meet and then my next question was um you know I've also been receiving the

    email and say I'm counting I think between 150 and 200 there might be some duplicates in there and one of the

    concerns was that um saying that seven of the nine last task force

    members were not involved in the discussion so I just wanted to know um like how many of the nine have you

    reached out to and how many of those have replied and also um how many of

    them are supportive of the idea of of looking into these issues

    and I think those are those are all my questions thank you vice president jordanick for doing it that way

    commissioner die yes thank you so so the time frame uh you know we're gonna

    figure out at our next meeting so so you know like I said I think part of taking

    a pause is making sure that all of the um educational material that that we

    have reviewed as a commission that is on our archive website is something that we can make more easily accessible to the

    public uh I know that uh we you know we had talked about putting up a page that's focused on this and that's under

    you know behind a long list of other projects for the website so it might be as simple as um look for providing the

    links directly in the project plan which is something I was hoping to do before this meeting but didn't have time to but

    I I will try to do that as soon rather than later so we can post that and that way people can directly go to the link

    instead of having to navigate through our archived website and figure that out and that the people have an idea of of

    all the different groups that we consulted and what the topics are uh

    yes we plan to keep meeting uh we're just trying to figure out what the agenda will be for the next meeting so

    that's why we wanted to get input from you guys uh I I do agree that it's possible to

    um be supportive of the general intent of a bill and not worry about the specifics and in fact

    um reiterated that that is Our intention as a commission since we do not draft legislation it's just to indicate that

    you know what reforms were supportive of and the details are are things to be worked out with the city attorney and

    our legislative champions uh and then finally as I mentioned

    earlier I got the emails for all of the past uh the 2021 redistricting task

    force members so all of them received it um I also uh had pointed out to

    um uh Mr casually who's one of our appointees uh who attended our first

    meeting that I had actually posted as a public comment to the redistricting task

    force that we were starting this process and had invited them to participate and

    so they had all received it in May of 2022 to admittedly their SF

    gov emails which they may have made I've actually checked and it was also posted as a public comment on their final

    report so they they got that uh invitation over a year ago then I reached out to them

    early this after our May uh 31st meeting and invited them as well as members of

    the previous two redistration task force to attend and testify

    I received a response from

    uh not counting the older we just receive

    that from the current redistricting task force members obviously Mr Jeremy Lee attended

    along with the chair and Reverend Arnold Townsend

    um Mr casel Lee one of our appointees uh was

    unable to attend but he did respond to me uh Mr raynell Cooper from whom we've

    heard before another one of our appointees said he would provide written comment

    um I also invited Mr Lee tooth but he didn't respond to that um we heard from our other appointee uh

    Ms sticker Reiner and she wrote a note but said she wasn't able to attend and wouldn't have time to review the

    legislation and try to think of there any other

    um those are the ones that I can think of off the top of my head I think there are one or two others who responded that

    they just couldn't attend uh and then a few others didn't respond and obviously Mr

    uh gill who had attended our first meeting so that's most of them actually

    okay thank you and also you could edit as well if you want to

    she answered the questions uh thank you vice president jordanick

    and thank you commissioner dye um I'll open it up for commissioner burnhall's commissioner Hayden Crowley

    do you have any comments questions or suggestions for our Direction

    um I have a couple of comments I don't see commissioner burnhall's hand but standing by in case

    um she does have a comment so thank you commissioners of ulci and commissioner

    die for the robust update um the I don't have any you know in

    response to your question about additional topics to explore just run my notes here

    um I don't have any additional asks you know I think the commission has uh learned a tremendous amount over the

    last year uh through this initiative through the folks who've come and spoken

    to us um and I you know offline I had we had

    spoken about this commissioner die I am glad to hear your idea about including

    the links in the project plan because I do think uh while it's also great as um

    in reference to vice president jordanick's Commissioners report about the archived Pages getting some cleanup

    from Digital Services I think there will be value in updating the project plan with uh the links and the names and the

    dates of folks who have spoken at the commission so people can easily access

    those um and I really appreciate you putting in the effort to do that because I think

    that's a good transparency measure the other additional piece that I just wanted to draw folks's attention to is

    the demo from the dcas from the last meeting May 17th agenda item number I

    wrote it down seven from the May 17th meeting it's a

    memo from April 23rd also talking about um the uh the state legislature not

    about updating the fair Maps act but talking about uh local redistricting which also provides some of a summary of

    the legislation the other additional piece I wanted to mention is that I know commissioner

    Parker wasn't able to join us today but I am looking forward to hearing her feedback and hearing her perspective I

    really appreciate both Commissioners lavolsi and commissioner dies thoughts I definitely want to make sure I have the

    opportunity to hear hers and then one of the last comments I have

    is just my feelings that um I I do think that there's value in

    seeing what happens with State legislation understanding kind of what will happen I

    know there have been measures like this in the past that have been vetoed by for

    a variety of reasons um and so I think they're

    it may be value and kind of waiting to see uh what does happen

    um and that doesn't so much mean you can't meet it's more just I think we've

    done a lot and namely commissioner dye you've done a tremendous amount to educate

    um I think it'll be great to give folks the ability to see all of the education that you've provided

    um and so giving it time to see what happens at the state level and

    um and then kind of regrouping as the committee is authorized to do to see

    then kind of how to move forward that's personally where I stand on the matter I

    recognize we are missing one Committee Member whose voice you know I'd love to hear and perhaps you know she can

    provide some additional thoughts in writing and also in the in the July meeting so other than that I don't have

    any um additional thoughts I I do Echo uh as I kind of woven into my comments I

    Echo the need for rebuilding restoring public trust I think that's not just

    about redistricting I think that's about just in general kind of what this body is for that we were created by the

    voters that we are a non-partisan body and I think when we're trying to tackle

    something as um as for lack of a better word contested as

    redistricting and as intense and tumultuous as it was for all different sides which you've laid out in your

    report I think there's value in the folks who are delivering you know some suggestions or reform being able to have

    a level of credibility with the public um so I think we're all kind of on the same page and echoing that but it might

    be valuable to think about that as as you prepare for the next committee meeting so those are my comments

    um and I will leave it to anyone else for any follow-ups

    okay um I don't see a hand raised by commissioner bernholds um if there are

    no other comments let's move to from the comments

    we're going to start with if that's okay yeah um so we're moving to public

    comment on agenda item number six fair independent and effective redistricting for Community engagement committee

    updates first we will begin with public comment in the room and then once that

    is completed we'll move to um uh participants who have joined remotely

    and then secretary Davis will you also ensure that the public commenters know when they're right when they have 30

    seconds if you're ready I will um set you for three minutes and then let you know at 30 seconds

    District eight I'm representing active eight SF um and that's

    a-c-t-588sf.com thank you

    um I'm reading from a page from the

    2022 SF redistricting task force reported as a member statement signed by

    Hernandez Pearson Lee and it's page 60 and it's the first sentence and the

    conclusion it says uh redistricting is a fundamentally political process

    and this really addresses the comments I heard from both of you who wrote Monday's meeting in several of you as

    well um it's fundamentally a political process this is what they wrote and I

    looked at the word fundamental we know what words means and see exactly what it means it's used

    to make a dramatic statement while on the basis

    whatever so we'll make sure your time is restored

    just bear with us for a moment okay please continue and uh so that's what uh that word means so anyway that's

    how important uh this line is here um if this is true what people do

    uh if this is true what people do we not want to participate in this

    fundamentally political process that's an important question I think if it's true and I believe it's true it's very

    fundamentally and political process so the answer is clearly though because people who are fundamentally

    right fundamentally now political people to be part of the process

    so who did the uh this board this appointing volume they appointed a

    public utilities lawyer they appointed a transportation planner they're playing a retired technology

    consultant from CEO all very

    form a data scientist yeah a financial asset manager and a board member at

    Huckleberry youth and finally a reference in an NAACP Orno again so you

    have six participants there all very non-political but then we go to the board supervisors

    and deleted Women Voters how they describe but first the member

    it's currently she's currently in political organizing

    secondly

    three to that point it's the Board of Supervisors executive director of the babies Community

    Advocates and they are a political organizing group seeking environmental justice they've been out of 25 years

    the last one is an employee of the Chinatown Community Development Center

    highly fundamentally politically at the non-profit permanent Supportive Housing

    provider completely different robotics we had six

    members who were just regular people and we had three of them that worked thank

    you yeah thank you and apologies for the technical issues during your comment and we appreciate it

    [Music] if you wouldn't mind also projecting

    into the microphone that would be great uh

    the activists uh that was there uh last night's feeding uh I I'm shocked I mean

    why is very very excited number one

    after existing me yeah of course Angry Bird all stopped right

    yeah it's the first batch female there's

    unclear if there were 10 billion dollars

    is still active and it was only after uh but she referred to as hundreds of

    orange Bells but actually not performing how many of them are people personal evil figurative faulting her out that

    she didn't even sleep together passport events itchy then big a real Attack to

    reach the other half uh she was able to get it too

    but one of them was a chair of the producing thousand words by the way oh geez should I start over

    or that's okay um by the way is an elderly black person

    and she just grossly misrepresented everything he said I mean

    please go home and watch the recording please but to just highlight a couple things

    um she says that he had admits to gerrymandering that

    she said that the focus was on creating safe districts uh he was referring to public commenters

    wanting to create safe districts for incumbents and she's

    she completely glosses over the fact that Arnold actually calls Lee out when he talks about having an agenda

    um he talks about having a political agenda Townsend says to Lee that night and I

    quote I take offense to that just because you couldn't convince me to vote your way doesn't mean that I had an

    agenda so I mean you know I'm sorry

    uh commissioner levelsi for a personal attack but I mean this is the definition

    of racism I mean this guy is not here to defend himself his comments were predominantly about his community and

    your grossly misrepresenting what he's saying just like you're trying to get

    this guy fired for being a straight white guy and do you guys remember last year when

    she tried to kick three redistricting task force members off the task force for no legal reason she had some fake

    person come from the ACLU fake person come from I mean Jesus Christ

    this cannot be a fair independent whatever unless you send that you got to resign you

    gotta resign I'm sorry all right thank you

    we actually have people online let me unmute the first caller who has a number

    starting with eight four seven

    important

    a mute I'm trying to unmute you because

    when you unmute yourself caller 847

    I'm going to go today okay there can you hear me now we can hear you I'm gonna

    give you three minutes apologies for that uh hi this is uh

    former redistricting Task Force member Matthew Costello from the uh from the

    20th 21 to 2022 task force I was not planning on calling in tonight uh but I

    could not contain myself after hearing the outright Collide from commissioner

    died tonight she completely completely forgot to mention the email

    that I responded to her that she acknowledged me that have been received

    and I'll read that to you all right now hello hello alexan's commission I'd like

    to perfectly common thing that we just became task force concluded in May 2 20 to 22. so none of us were checking our

    government emails I certainly never received any communication that commissioner dot claims to have sent us

    first off I'd like to express my disappointment is so late can you open

    your website you've been conducting hearings for about a year on the subject of it and this is certainly the first I'm hearing of any of it furthermore I

    am beyond confused as to why local unelected body of Elections Commissioners is looking into drafting the charter Amendment based on state

    legislation that has not passed for one the elections commission is not allegedly in the body there's nothing in

    the election commission's mandate that issues authority to draft a charter message in fact from your own meeting

    documents the commission itself is admits that you cannot take a position on a measure one

    person could say that is an appropriate way to craft a charter a message additionally we have no idea how the

    legislation in Sacramento will plan out the timeline assumes that the legislation but that is no guarantee in

    fact the government needs some veto similar legislation in 2019. actually have no idea what you see if

    California will require of us but most importantly over the past year the elections commission has proven themselves incapable of making good

    decisions for the City and County of San Francisco from the way the commission and Bears or see what the family of

    nationally renowned elections directors on Earth the entire lack of Outreach to previous task force members like myself

    to the elections commission's own inappropriate interference in the most recent recent searching process is clear

    that the election commission has no you're not a legislative body please

    focus on what your mandate is approving plans for the conduction of Elections thank you

    okay Genty I'm trying to unmute you here thank you

    there we go are you yes we can hear you I'll give you three minutes

    you're ready uh thanks um hi this is Dante with

    illegal voters of San Francisco uh thank you to the elections commission's uh

    Fair independent and effective redistricting through Canadian engagement committee for their meetings and the invited speakers for your

    discussion on redistricting reform and the members of the public for showing up your districting is a priority for the

    legal woman voters and we support continuing the process our redistricting reform and all the work the elections

    commission has done reform takes time and we need to ask before people forget about redistricting we can't wait nine

    years or any time we should not wait for independent registering commission and

    for independent redistricting commissions like California and Oakland they started their selection process for

    commissioners before the census they started in 2019 and for the California citizens redistricting commission they

    are still working on their final report and their fifth grade posted this month one of their recommendations is to start

    this watching process and the work of the CRC four to six months earlier so that would be like what in 2018 our

    Charter did not let us start redistricting in the factory field until the end of 2021 under our Charter we

    can't start the redistration process until the central the census is published and not in compliance with the

    federal and state laws our city supervisors who served in 2024 will not

    be impacted by redistricting reform because they will be termed out by the time reform takes aside the longer we

    delay the reform the likely to Transit city of Supervisors will have us in the reform outcome and having

    invested interest in redistricting outcomes is the kind of thing that leads to gerrymandering also about my previous

    Charter suggestion if I can refine my suggestion I think if we delete the first two paragraphs

    um of the charter sections around redistricting we would then fall under

    ab849 that was passed in 2019 which was a fair amount of fact

    um like we would fall under the criteria because uh paragraph one is a section about how San Francisco can start

    redistricting process only of her defenses and paragraph two is about the criteria itself in the charter and the

    paragraph three that's the part about the selection of its task force so I think if we delete the first two partners of the um of the section in the

    charter and redistricting uh we can be FML FM FMA compliant but we would still

    have a political appointed task force so please double check with the DCA again

    it is not too early to work on reforms the time is the act now thank you

    um secretary Davis before we move to the next public commenter I'm hearing that it's kind of difficult to hear I don't

    know if there if there's a way for us to mute while public commenters are speaking that might be

    an option I know we tried to do a little bit but we do we do apologize for

    um for the issues there okay we have no more public calls okay all right well I apologize

    um thank you all public commenters we appreciate that are there any other comments before we close out this agenda

    item good vice president Jordan yeah I just have a question for Deputy City

    attorneys in one of the commenters Mr Castillo costume um you know was saying that because

    we're not a legislative body um you know saying we can't do certain

    things are like are we allowed to um you know I wouldn't say that we're

    drafting an amendment but are we allowed to like ask the Board of Supervisors to put something on the ballot with that run

    afoul of like um you know that what the charter says or

    or does it I think you're allowed to board the board on any excuse me

    thank you I believe you're allowed to work on the board on any

    um item that you find sufficient um I know that you worked with the board to do open source voting so similar

    um if you'd like to work with the Board of Supervisors on on any legislative action you're welcome to do so uh you

    you just can't put um a ballot measure on the ballot on your own

    and then and then if something goes on the Bell the commission would need to be neutral obviously at any point that

    something is um goes on the ballot um then at that point uh we can't use

    public funds to advocate for or on behalf of a candidate or a measure uh but once that ballot designation is made

    that's essentially the cutoff for advocating for a ballot measure you can provide information to the public on the

    ballot measure but it has to be neutral and it has to be unbiased

    thank you

    okay thank you um Commissioners die commissioner labelsey

    commissioner Parker and absentra and public commentaries we appreciate your

    input on this topic we're going to close out agenda item number six and move to agenda item number seven discussion and

    passable action regarding the annual performance evaluation of John Ernst director of Elections first and foremost

    we're going to take public comment on all matters pertaining to this agenda item including whether to meet in closed

    session so secretary Davis can you let us know if there are any public commenters

    I'm just I do not seems

    no public commenters thank you secretary Davis um so we will now take a vote on whether

    to meet in closed session to consider this agenda item secretary Davis please take the um the

    Roll Call um I'm going to take a vote on this President Stone yes

    vice president jordanick yes commissioner bernholz yes

    commissioner died I commissioner Hayden Crowley yes

    commissioner levolsi yes commissioner Parker is absent

    so with six it passes yes thank you no problem so we'll move to see closed

    session which will be held pursuant to around act section 54957b and the sun's right ordinance to

    discuss the evaluation of a Public Employee um so for members of the public just so you are aware we're going into closed

    session at 8 30 pm and we will um basically turn off uh video and audio

    so we will return we will announce Upon Our return when we are back in Open Session

    thank you sir

    okay um commissioner burnhose will you just put

    a thumb up if you can hear us I can hear you great

    um okay the time is now 8 47 or excuse me 9 47.

    um wishful thinking about um PM um and we are now in Open Session

    um we are moving to 7e discussion vote pursuant Ascension ordinance on whether

    to disclose any portion of the closed session discussion regarding the public employee performance evaluation

    um do we have any motion do we need to make a motion or do we

    just move straight to a vote sorry

    thank you for meeting me so we're back into the translation sorry

    I didn't even know how to respond so um

    yeah I move that we not disclose any portion of the closed session thank you vice president Jordan

    anyone else second second bat thank you commissioner die for the second

    um so we're now going to move to a roll call vote on the motion to not disclose

    any portion of um the contents of closed session

    secretary Davis will you take the vote please president Stone yes sorry

    vice president yes

    yes I

    commissioner Hayden Brown yes yes

    great unanimous

    thank you um so we will not move to nope we will

    not disclose any portion of the um post session and that closes agenda

    item number seven given that we've already taken public comment so we're going to move to agenda item number eight agenda items for future meetings

    do we have any comments

    commissioner Hayden Crowley when is the retreat yes I will send you an email thank you

    you're welcome I have commissioner um is it possible to talk about our

    goals for the next agenda meeting

    um um BCAAs I hope so

    sorry

    no that that was a topic that was a Content info session

    that's okay

    it's okay no it's for the I understand um and we talk about the goals that we

    would like to achieve as a commission I understand put that on the agenda I will

    take that under consideration thank you commissioner ovulsi anyone else

    yes um no we're working on that

    and it I know yeah it will comply with all the

    rules I'm very aware yes I am very aware I know all the rules working on it

    [Music] um anyone else okay let's move to public comment

    s okay the time is um 9 51 pm and I join this with me thank

    you 

     

    View transcript

    Call in and make a public comment during the meeting

    Call in and make a public comment during the meeting

    Follow these steps to call in

    • Call 415-655-0001 and enter the access code
    • Press #
    • Press # again to be connected to the meeting (you will hear a beep)

    Make a public comment 

    • After you've joined the call, listen to the meeting and wait until it's time for the item you're interested in
    • When the clerk announces the item you want to comment on, dial *3 to get added to the speaker line
    • You will hear “You have raised your hand to ask a question. Please wait to speak until the host calls on you"
    • When you hear "Your line has been unmuted," you can make your public comment

    When you speak

    • Make sure you're in a quiet place
    • Speak slowly and clearly
    • Turn off any TVs or radios
    • Speak to the Commission as a whole, not to specific Commissioners

    Make a comment from your computer

    Make a comment from your computer

    Join the meeting

    • Join the meeting using the link above

    Make a public comment 

    • Click on the Participants button
    • Find your name in the list of Attendees
    • Click on the hand icon to raise your hand
    • The host will unmute you when it is time for you to comment
    • When you are done with your comment, click the hand icon again to lower your hand

    When you speak

    • Make sure you're in a quiet place
    • Speak slowly and clearly
    • Turn off any TVs or radios
    • Speak to the Commission as a whole, not to specific Commissioners

    Commission packets

    Commission packets

    Materials contained in the Commission packets for meetings are available for inspection and copying during regular office hours at the Department of Elections, City Hall Room 48. Materials are placed in the Elections Commission's Public Binder no later than 72 hours prior to meetings.

    Any materials distributed to members of the Elections Commission within 72 hours of the meeting or after the agenda packet has been delivered to the members are available for inspection at the Department of Elections, City Hall Room 48, in the Commission's Public Binder, during normal office hours.

    Cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices

    Cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices

    The ringing of and use of cell phones, pagers and similar sound-producing electronic devices are prohibited at this meeting. The Chair may order the removal from the meeting room of any person responsible for the ringing or use of a cell phone, pager, or other similar sound-producing electronic devices.

    Disability access

    Disability access

    The Commission meeting will be held in Room 408, City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, San Francisco, CA. The meeting room is wheelchair accessible.

    The closest accessible BART station is the Civic Center Station at United Nations Plaza and Market Street. Accessible MUNI lines serving this location are: #42 Downtown Loop, and #71 Haight/Noriega and the F Line to Market and Van Ness and the Metro Stations at Van Ness and Market and at Civic Center. For information about MUNI accessible services call (415) 923-6142.

    There is accessible curbside parking adjacent to City Hall on Grove Street and Van Ness Avenue and in the vicinity of the Veterans Building at 401 Van Ness Avenue adjacent to Davies Hall and the War Memorial Complex.

    To obtain a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, to participate in a meeting, please contact the Department of Elections at least 48 hours before the meeting, except for Monday meetings, for which the deadline is 4:00 p.m. the previous Friday. Late requests will be honored, if possible.

    Services available on request include the following: American sign language interpreters or the use of a reader during a meeting, a sound enhancement system, and/or alternative formats of the agenda and minutes. Please contact the Department of Elections at (415) 554-4375 or our TDD at (415) 554-4386 to make arrangements for a disability-related modification or accommodation.

    Chemical based products

    Chemical based products

    In order to assist the City's efforts to accommodate persons with severe allergies, environmental illnesses, multiple chemical sensitivity or related disabilities, attendees at public meetings are reminded that other attendees may be sensitive to various chemical-based products. Please help the City accommodate these individuals.

    Know your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance

    Know your rights under the Sunshine Ordinance

    Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, boards, councils, and other agencies of the City and County exist to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's review.

    FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE SUNSHINE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE SUNSHINE ORDINANCE TASK FORCE:

    Sunshine Ordinance Task Force
    1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place
    Room 244
    San Francisco, CA 94102-4689
    Phone: (415) 554-7724
    Fax: (415) 554-5163
    Email: sotf@sfgov.org
    Website: http://sfgov.org/sunshine

    Copies of the Sunshine Ordinance can be obtained from the Clerk of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, at the San Francisco Public Library, and on the City's website.

    Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements

    Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements

    Individuals that influence or attempt to influence local policy or administrative action may be required by the San Francisco Lobbyist Ordinance (San Francisco Campaign and Governmental Conduct Code sections 2.100 – 2.160) to register and report lobbying activity.

    For more information about the Lobbyist Ordinance, please contact:

    San Francisco Ethics Commission
    25 Van Ness Avenue
    Suite 220
    San Francisco, CA 94102
    Phone: (415) 252-3100
    Fax: (415) 252-3112
    Email: ethics.commission@sfgov.org
    Website: sfethics.org

    Last updated September 12, 2023

    Departments