Elections Commission Regular Meeting

Wednesday, February 15, 2023

In this page:


    See below agenda item #1 for a PDF version of the agenda and the remaining items for the agenda packet documents.

    Meeting recording (Duration: 3:27:39):

    (Also see below the agenda for the video with transcript.)


    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. Discussion and Possible Action on Continuation of Remote Meetings

      Discussion and possible action regarding the resolution to continue remote meetings under the COVID-19 State of Emergency special rules.

      Attachments: City Attorney Memo Regarding Public Meetings and Findings Motion.

    4. Approval of Previous Meeting Minutes

      Discussion and possible action on previous Elections Commission meeting minutes.

      Attachments: December 12, 2022 Draft Minutes; January 18, 2023 Draft Minutes.

    5. Discussion and Possible Action on the Department of Elections’ 2023 – 2025 Budget

      The Commission is required to conduct two public reviews of the Department’s budget no less than 15 days apart. On January 27, the Director of Elections submitted its budget for Commission review. The Elections Commission’s Budget and Oversight Committee convened & conducted the initial budget review on January 31. Today, February 15 is the Commission’s second and final budget review. Upon its approval, the budget will be submitted to the Office of the Mayor no later than February 21.

      Attachments: Department of Elections 2023 – 2025 Budget; Request for Elections Commissioner Laptop Computers (Hayden-Crowley).

    6. Director's Report

      Discussion and possible action regarding the Director’s Report.

      Attachments: February 2023 Director’s Report.

    7. 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: Official Reappointment Letter of Director John Arntz (Stone); Elections Commission Bylaws (Stone); Robert’s Rules Reference Guide (Stone); "The Promise of Fair Maps" Report (Dai).

    8. Director of Elections 2022 Performance Evaluation

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

      • a.  Public comment on all matters pertaining to this agenda item, including whether to meet in closed session.
      • b.  Vote on whether to meet in closed session to consider item #8 pursuant to California Government Code§54957(b) and San Francisco Administrative Code§67.10(b). (Action)
      • c.  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)
      • d.  If closed session is held, reconvene in open session.
      • e.  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)
      • f.  Disclosure of action taken, if any, that must be disclosed pursuant to Brown Act section 54957.1 and Sunshine Ordinance section 67.12(b).
    9. Reporting of Voting System Security Issues

      Discussion and possible action regarding the DVSorder privacy flaw affecting San Francisco's Dominion Voting System and reporting of potential, similar voting system security issues to the Department of Elections.

      Guest Speaker: J. Alex Halderman, Professor of Computer Science and Engineering at the University of Michigan and Director of Michigan's Center for Computer Security and Society.

      Attachments: J. Alex Halderman Email and Attachment; Memo Re: DVSorder (Jerdonek); DVSorder website: https://dvsorder.org

    10. Discussion and Possible Action on Commission Policies Regarding Remote Public Comment & Parental Leave

      Discussion and possible action on considerations elevated in the City Attorney’s January 20 memorandum and public opinion regarding the continuation of remote public participation, in addition to parental leave policies.

      Attachments: City Attorney’s Memo Regarding Legal Rules Governing Remote Participation by Members of Policy Bodies in Meetings Beginning March 1, 2023.

    11. Agenda items for future meetings

      Discussion and possible action regarding items for future agendas.

    12. Adjournment

    Date & Time

    Wednesday, February 15, 2023
    6:00 pm

    City Hall, Room 408

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


    Event number: 2488 369 9301
    Event password: sfvote (use 738683 from phones)
    Join the meeting


    Access code: 2488 369 9301
    Event password: 738683 (for phones only)

    Meeting recording (Duration: 3:27:39)


    welcome everyone to the February 15th 2023 regular meeting of the San Francisco elections commission I'm

    president Robin Stone The Time Is Now 601 pm and I call the meeting to order

    this meeting is being held in person at City Hall Room 408 Juan Carlton B Goodlett Place San Francisco California

    94102 as authorized by California government code section

    5493e and mayor breeds 45th supplement to her February 25th 2020 emergency

    Proclamation it is possible that some members of the elections commission may attend this meeting remotely in the in

    that event those members will participate and vote by video members of the public May attend the meeting to

    observe and provide public comment at the physical meeting location listed above or online

    uh this meeting the minutes of this meeting will reflect that this meeting is being held in person at City Hall

    Room 408 um in addition to participating in real time interested persons are encouraged

    to participate in this meeting by submitting public comment in writing by 12 p.m on the day of the meeting to

    election stock commission at sfgov.org we shared with the commission after this meeting is concluded and will be

    included as a part of the official meeting file public comment will be available on each item on this agenda each member of the

    public will be allowed three minutes to speak opportunities to speak during the public comment period are available via

    phone call by calling 1-415-655-0001 again the phone number is

    1-415-655-0001 access code

    2488-369-9301 again 2488-369-9301

    followed by a pound then press pound again to join as an attendee you'll hear a beep and when you're connected and you

    will be connected to the meeting you'll be automatically muted and in listening mode only when your item of Interest

    comes up dial Star 3 to raise your hand to be added to the public comment line You'll then hear you have raised your

    hand to ask a question please wait until the host calls in you the line will be silent as you await your turn to speak

    ensure you are in a quiet room before you speak mute the sound of any equipment around you including

    television radio or computer it is especially important that you mute your computer if you're watching via the web link to prevent feedback and Echo when

    you speak when the system message says your line has been unmuted that's your turn to speak you're encouraged to state

    your name clearly as soon as you begin speaking you have three minutes to provide your public comment six minutes

    if you're online with an interpreter you will hear a bell go off when you have 30 seconds remaining if you change your

    mind and wish to withdraw yourself in the public line press from the comment line press star 3 again you will hear

    the system say you have lowered your hand when a phone is not available herbal you can use your computer web browser make sure the participant side

    panel is showing by clicking on the participants icon make sure the participants panel is expanded in the

    side panel by pressing the small Arrow indicator on in the panel you should see a list of panelists followed by a list

    of attendees at the bottom of the list of attendees is a small button or icon that looks like a hand press the hand

    icon to raise your hand you'll be on you'll be unmuted when it is a time for you to comment when you're done with

    your comment click the hand icon again to lower your hand once your three minutes have expired we will thank you

    and you will be muted you will hear your line has been muted public comment instructions are listed at the end of

    this agenda you want hard copy let's proceed with item one commission roll call

    uh Commissioners please on my mute your microphone if you're participating remotely so you can verbally State Your

    Presence at today's meeting if your name is called vice president jordanick here

    commissioner burn holes here commissioner die here commissioner

    Hayden Crowley here commissioner lavosi here commissioner Parker here and I

    president Stone and president with several members present and accounted for we have a quorum

    um friendly reminder to fellow Commissioners and participants in today's meeting we request that you mute your microphones when not speaking to

    avoid audio factoring the meeting and with that we will move on to the uh

    land acknowledgment with vice president jordanick has kindly accepted

    um to state the San Francisco elections commission acknowledges that we are on the unseated

    ancestral homeland of the remita shaloni or the original inhabitants of the San

    Francisco Peninsula as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their Traditions the ramay to

    Shalom you have never seated 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 reminders community and affirming their Sovereign rights as first peoples

    thank you vice president journanic and we'll move to agenda item number two

    general public comment public comment on any issue within the election commission's General jurisdiction that

    is not covered by another item on this agenda

    okay I see one hand up so this is Mr Turner I unmuted you

    and you will have three minutes when you begin talking thank you uh

    thank you Commissioners and hello to all good evening um I wanted to read into the record real

    quick uh I'm off that piece that was written uh and published in this last

    week uh by myself and former Chief White House ethics lawyer Richard painter who

    is a professor at Minnesota currently uh the January 6th attack on the capitol

    over false allegations of 2020 election fraud and the rise in domestic terrorism

    has many Americans fearful about lack of public confidence in our elections

    recently there's been heightened concern regarding the hackability of our voting systems by Russia China and other

    potential adversaries now there is a solution to uncertainty about the way we

    count votes open source vote tabulation software that shows everyone how it's

    done and that the results are accurate for over 20 years technologists have

    been warning the U.S government about threats to the proprietary voting software systems by outside and inside

    country interference agents in California the little Hoover Commission recently advised Governor Gavin Newsom

    to move immediately toward the publicly viewable open source code voting systems now in front of California's work New

    Hampshire and Mississippi have upgraded the voting software component for elections by embracing open source

    voting New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlon recently released an audit

    announcing the their open source public voting system pilot as its success

    open source software is simply defined as code that is designed to be publicly

    accessible anyone can see modify and distribute the code as they see fit this

    does not create added security concerns but actually allows Defenders of a system to combat hackers with with more

    ease and efficiency transparency Advocates recommend an agpl license for

    open source public voting systems I wanted to bring this to your attention as we now see legislation coming forward

    in the state of Alaska uh some federal legislation

    coming out of Arizona and uh even more recently the um uh Bill coming out of

    New Jersey that all basically mandate open source software and move to make

    proprietary software illegal for public elections we applaud

    San Francisco's work and hope to see progress in the near future thank you

    okay thank you

    so there are I see no other public commenters

    so with that we'll move on to agenda item number three discussion and possible action and continuation of

    remote meetings discussion and possible action regarding the resolution to continue remote meetings under the

    covid-19 state of emergency special rules I move we adopt the resolution

    I second it wonderful

    that I will call it vote unless there's discussion public comment oh public company before the vote sorry

    um we'll take public comment

    I see no hands raised okay now we will take the vote um vice president jordanick yes

    commissioner burn holes yes commissioner die aye commissioner Hayden Crowley yes

    commissioner levolsi yes commissioner Parker yes and I uh president Stone vote

    Yes great uh moving on to agenda item number

    four approval of previous meeting minutes discussion and possible action on previous Election Commission meeting minutes uh specifically today we're

    going to talk about December 12 2022 and January 18th 2023. with that I'll open

    it up should anyone have any comments

    so I had submitted a couple of changes most were minor typos

    um the only substance of change that I wanted to call the admissions attention to

    if you look at proposed edits would be on

    monthly seven of eight

    where I just wanted to clarify that uh I was giving an update on media

    activities that I was authorized to perform on behalf of the commission and also that I was invited to the

    meeting with supervisor Aaron Eskin by supervisor peskin

    so I've offered some more choices most of my other comments were attempts

    to help the president figure out who some of our public commenters were

    um commissioner Parker I also have another correction on January 18th

    meeting um I was sworn on January 17th thank you for that

    if we're moving on to January I only had one substantive change for January um uh commissioner died let's sorry just

    in terms of making sure everyone had a chance to comment before any commissioner makes a second comment if

    you don't mind does anyone else have a first comment that they would like to make no thank you

    okay commissioner die please thank you president Stone um

    the change would be on

    page four of my edited version I just uh

    wanted to add in for the record here um director Arts comment about uh Dominion

    systems having addressed the flaw that was uh pointed out to the commission


    does anyone else have any comments pertaining to the minutes

    so I included this in the this is commissioner Stone

    um I included this in the um in both the uh Roberts rules packet item which we'll

    talk about a little bit later but also I believe I mentioned I put it in the excerpt at the beginning of the meeting

    minutes um actually maybe I didn't it is in the Robert's Rules packet item but um just

    to elevate this to everyone again uh the minutes don't actually require a motion

    for approval um and so really just ensuring that everyone is comfortable with the

    proposed revisions from General consensus so if anyone has an objection

    to commissioner dies and commissioner Parker's changes

    um would be great to share that now um otherwise I will consider that this

    consensus support for the amended changes as drafted

    are there any objections

    vice president jordanick yeah well I did want to make a comment it's not an objection but I also just wanted to make

    sure we do public comment too yeah okay but um I just wanted to um just thank you for doing the minutes

    I know as someone who did them before it takes a long time and since you know I'm

    a secretary just wanted to thank you for for that and also the commissioner die for your edits too

    thank you and for you doing the previous minutes appreciate that okay let's

    take public comment

    okay I do not see any hands raised right so um and it seems as though there

    are no objective objections and as I mentioned we don't need to call a vote so I think that moves us right along to

    um agenda item number five discussion and possible action on the Department of Elections 2023 2025

    budget the commission is required to conduct two public reviews of the Department's budget no less than 15 days

    apart on January 27th the director of Elections submitted its his budget for commission review elections commission's

    budget and oversight committee convened and conducted the initial budget review on January 31st

    today February 15th is the commission's second and final budget review upon its approval the budget will be submitted to

    the office the mayor no later than February 21st and so today we will be discussing the

    budget and in addition the commissioner Hayden Crowley's uh request for a

    specific budget lineup so with that I guess we'll hand it over

    to director arnst should you have any comments thank you president Stone uh so the

    budget is we have not we've not made any changes since the Mopac meeting but I did notice some changes in my directors

    report uh so we did increase the grant funding uh to the community organizations for

    both the March and and uh presidential elections and we increased the advertising amount

    in our in the budget it's not entered in the system but it's in our proposed it'll be our proposed budget uh then we

    also as president Stone mentioned we did include the Chromebooks for one for each of the Commissioners and also one for

    the the new uh commission secretary and then uh we also included we met with

    youth Works uh on uh have the ambassadors we have at the high schools

    uh before they they were volunteers so we we collaborated with with youth Works

    to uh have the ambassadors receive stipends and so that the 12 600 is

    included for each fiscal year for essentially the march of November elections uh for next year and also what

    will be included in the budget will be um some sort of something around the I voted sticker uh right thinking right

    now this is kind of in my director's report but it relates the budget uh so the thinking is now that we could

    partner with the the Arts commission and have them conduct some sort of I don't

    know what it is competition however you want and we would through our funds provide

    the Monies to the Arts commission for both their work and then also for

    whoever the the artist that's chosen or the the submission that's chosen for a

    new I voted sticker so we haven't set the specifications for an iPhone is sticker yet we have it it'll be the same

    size so the size will be the same because that's set for what we put into our vote by mail inserts and for the

    ballots uh as far as specifications on on the sticker we we haven't thought

    about that or the process yet but that will also be included in our proposed budget right now we've penciled in ten

    thousand dollars uh an idea our thinking going in at least at this point would be

    that 5 thousand would would go to the Arts commission for for their work and

    then five thousand uh for uh the participants and and I don't know how what what their process is like so I

    really can't give you any more information on that this is just a budget update and then overall on our budget

    um as I mentioned in bowpack the mayor's office has required departments to reduce their uh accounts

    by five percent in the next fiscal year and eight percent and the following fiscal year for 24 25. and due to prop

    age since we have no scheduled election in the fiscal year 23-24 we actually

    have a savings of around 7 million dollars and that's actually around 13 of

    our 24 25 of the two-year budgets actually so we're considering that the

    the removal of the November 2023 election as essentially our cost savings

    for the city uh so we didn't we are looking for efficiencies in our budget uh but we're not looking to make like

    eight percent cut for the the presidential cycle um and this this is not final this is our

    proposal so the mayor's office still needs to to have its response to what we're doing and uh as far as the the impact though

    besides the financial impact on 24 25 especially with the presidential

    uh we we ran the numbers and we think that the the ballot with the additional five local contests and probably the

    additional uh measures that would go on that ballot we'd we'd probably at the most get to a seven card ballot and we

    know now that our our system can run our our scanning system could run an eight

    card ballot in the current envelope and it can run up to a 10 card ballot in a larger size

    envelope so we think we're okay with with this with the shorter um and I think also with the timing of

    the uh of the ballot measure process that the Board of Supervisors would able

    we would be able to forecast the number of cards by the number of measures that the boards considering to know if we

    have to go to a larger envelope or not and that's actually a rather big deal for us so we think that that we're in

    good shape with our current equipment so we don't have scanners different types

    of scanners in here we still have a funding for scanner in the 2324 budget

    and that would be a supplemental scanner that we would probably stage at the warehouse and that way we could scan the

    provision on the football mail ballots come back from the polling places ideally all the provisional and some of

    the vote by mail ballots so we get more throughput going into Wednesday then especially into Thursday

    uh the only drawback if we go to eight cards is we have to do a manual opening

    of the envelopes and so that would be more cost and then we haven't really accounted for that but we're thinking uh

    even with the highest number of measures that we've had in the last 15 years

    which is 24 I think it was in 26 November 2016. and with the additional

    five contests even though the ranked choice we probably still would be at seven or less cards so we think we're

    okay with the equipment but there is an extra scanner still that was that and that was in the the

    proposed budget when volpeck met um most of our costs are or the or the

    non-personnel types of stuff ballots um printing things like that and unlike a

    lot of departments in the city uh uh Personnel is not our is not our highest cost

    and um I I guess I can take questions at this point on the budget

    um so um vice president Jordan yeah I just

    wanted to should I should I give a report back from the committee at some point too if you if you would like yes

    okay yeah just kind of for formality so um sorry I chaired the meeting in

    president Stone and commissioner Hayden Crowley were the other two members and it was a remote meeting and we just had the one agenda item about the budget in

    addition to the the general public comments and everything so one one thing instructor Ernst this

    time he provided the the information that we requested back in September which is really good to see it was like

    a breakdown of the the non-personnel costs which was a very large amount it was the 12 million in the first year and

    then 14 and a half million the other year and then also there was the list of the the various equipment contracts he

    has which was good to see in one place um as director Ernst mentioned we um we

    did tuck a fair amount about the um the two things that are going to impact the length of the ballot the proposition H

    and then the the new ballot label Printing and um just the various

    challenges around that like it's going to require more floor space and whether we should

    um secure like another building or which he's gonna use the warehouse

    um which you just said and then we talked about the cuts that are being requested and then we talked a

    little bit about the the commission's budget and how that relates to the overall budget we didn't spend a whole

    lot of time talking about if there's anything we wanted to request although commissioner Hayden Crowley made the

    request about the laptops and we we didn't take a vote on that though

    um and I think those are the main things I don't know if any of the other members wanted to

    comment on anything else that we discussed commissioner Hayden Crowley um thank you

    president Stone um director Arts um thank you for your thorough uh

    summary of the budget once again um I do still have this sort of feeling

    that you've got and and you're probably game plan for this because you gained plan for everything

    um is that you're anticipating the seven page ballot your your your machines can

    handle eight pages that might be a bigger envelope so like I guess in my

    mind I'm thinking you're hoping that it won't happen but in my mind I'm thinking but what if

    it does happen so and then the other thing is is the the propositions because in the past you haven't filled out you

    haven't had as many as it could be but we're skipping a year so you know there's this sort of un you know a a

    backup if you will maybe and I guess um you you'll be presenting to the

    budget committee at the Board of Supervisors do you know when that is be the third weekend's unit under the

    dates well for the second third week there'll be two hearings okay so I guess I'm sure you have private

    private president and the folks on those from maybe in advance but I definitely would flag those issues just because if

    something were to come up down the line I I just think it would be prudent

    that's all just so that they're you so that they can't say they weren't made aware of those issues and if they feel

    that it's something that they think that you should prepare for let them think it you know let them come back to you I

    just want to cover all the bases and and it's really to protect you and your department to make sure that nothing

    goes wrong because it's a big deal we're not having an election this next year and then you're going to have this big

    election in 2024 it's a presidential election and we just want to make sure because of the uncertainty around some

    of this that we are completely covered and I think if if the of course the

    mayor's budget folks and so forth you have that separate conversation but I do think it's important to brief the board

    on the potential that while you're not anticipating this it could happen so

    that's just my comment

    commissioner die director Arts um so I have a number of questions some

    of them are probably basic and some just some clarifications

    so I found that the table of all the contracts in one place helpful but I

    wanted to clarify those annual amounts because you had a time period and then you had an amount

    or are they totals because I couldn't make the numbers work

    out or the other Professional Services line item and other equipment maintenance I

    was trying to translate the numbers from the from the contracts

    into the table three into the breakdown and I couldn't get them to add up and I was wondering whether some of them were

    annual and some of them were total amounts so this would be

    table number one the department of contract so I know that the Dominion voting systems contract the 2.1 million

    is per year are all the other ones per year also or were they total amounts for the contract

    period those are per year so essentially fiscal

    year ah okay so

    um so for example Opex Corporation 28 000 was under other equipment

    maintenance and then when I looked in table three under other equipment

    maintenance it was only twelve thousand and table three

    so the 12 000 is for the the the parts

    and then the contract amount is separate it's a so

    so one is for

    I was again just trying to to uh reconcile the information in in table

    one with the information in table three I'm just trying to translate those yeah

    so there's not one to one those two tables which I gathered because I couldn't lift

    the mat up I was assuming assume at the budget account the category it might include some other

    things but that number was actually lower than the entire contract amount

    for Opex Corporation so I was just trying to understand how they do Translate

    well so the the contract part is the services for Opex for instance the one

    and then the other maintenance the equipment maintenance would be for the parts for any any servicing that would

    occur okay so once parts and one service got it

    um okay so I don't know if any other

    Commissioners tried to add those numbers but that that was a little confusing to me

    so maybe uh because it still shows up under other equipment maintenance

    which is the same budget item that you had under for table one for for that as

    well yeah so the contracts the Commissioners asked about contracts so we we that's where that table that's why

    that table is presented and then there's other categories of this so the category

    has other items we try to list some of those as well in table three

    please okay they're not contracts though all right so but in table one what you're

    telling me is that the dollar amount presented is an annual amount corresponds to a fiscal year and those

    are purely Services it does not include Parts correct okay for the Opex


    and run back also it would be a separate parts would be extra and then dfm and

    democracy live there are there are no parts there's no those those are essentially Services software Services

    okay all right well that explains the discrepancy so okay I was just trying to

    to reconcile those two amounts um and is dfm the one that corresponds

    to the eims right yes yeah okay

    uh great and then um

    I was a little astounded at the amount for printing of course but that makes sense right

    um how much of the printing budget is for the voter information pamphlet and

    what do you think the savings would be if we could get

    people to go to an electronic version I know that we had doesn't come up in a

    previous meeting but I don't think we got had any numbers at the time I think it was nearly two wasn't really two for

    the VIP yeah round two um yeah you know opting out and we did

    contact uh we've had conversation with Department environment about uh uh

    recycling but also promoting the opting in the the the digital version and then

    they had some ideas and they told us you know how we could um integrate those Concepts into their

    work without them having to to change um and you know one suggestion that

    really I think we got to think about is maybe instead of having an opt out we have an opt-in in yes you know and

    uh and then what we could do instead of having a voter guy go out to everyone before the election we could actually

    send a postcard and indicate the location to to obtain that information

    online yeah that would need to change and that's actually the the Municipal elections coach it would be an ordinance

    not a charter so that's something that the board could put forward and that's

    actually something I would put forward to the board uh going into the budget because that would be a very large

    savings uh I know there's going to be pushback and moving away from the paper what permission pamphlet

    um if we gave enough enough notice to people you know potentially we could we could curb those fears well we actually

    saved two million or would it be 1.7 million or what what do you think oh I

    mean you're basically you're moving from the postcards probably cost 250 to 3 to send out to every voter uh

    then you have to consider that the state says that it's it's voter

    guide to every residential address right he doesn't send it to everyone in the residence right so I don't think the

    postcard noticing the first election would go to Every residence I think would have to go to Every voter but I

    think in succeeding elections the notice could go to every every household potentially once people have an idea and

    I think you could also have new voters get newly registered voters to receive more notices than an established voter

    you know and that that would be a cost of savings as well so yeah I mean the the postcards would cost but there would

    definitely be reduction as far as overall costs are for the voter guide

    and uh you know that's not really including postage for those books you

    get when you get a book that's 300 Pages that's that's over a dollar in postage alone you know uh then also you don't

    have the delivery issues every election where the postal carriers will just drop bundles of voter guides and a hotel

    lobby and not distributed them but because those books don't fit into the mail slots right and the older the older

    hotels or apartments and uh so yeah I I really I a lot of ways I think at the

    time has come that we have to think of of opting in or sort of an opting out so we'll you know we'll have those

    conversations and that's something certainly I can contact the board president about and see if there's if there's interest

    and we could put some numbers together um but in the near term at least the what we know we can do is for people to

    opt out and so we'll pursue that in conjunction with the Department of environment and also put noticing on our

    on our website and then uh we can include that in our Outreach before the election you know much longer than go

    green come up with a new tagline yeah we have one in there it's uh oh I already forgot it

    um but uh oh it's quick it's free uh you know I

    can't remember what it is but uh opt-in for your VIP you can save a tree something like that yeah um it's fast

    it's free requests there you go yeah yeah no I think I think it's not only

    appealing to people's sense of the environment but I think the cost because you know when I reviewed this budget in

    detail struck me there are a lot of things that we really can't change as you pointed out there are many fixed costs that we're kind of stuck with but

    this seems like the biggest opportunity for savings and just like prop h i mean

    if you tell people how much their voter information packet actually costs uh and

    do it in aggregate because a dollar doesn't sound like much for postage and I don't know what it is per person for each one of those but if you tell them

    what it costs to mail out to everyone how much money would save the city I think a lot of people who might have

    been reluctant to get a digital one would think twice I know I would I mean

    I I'm like okay this can't be that expensive right and it's really convenient for me to be able to thumb through it but if I knew how much it was

    costing the city and the size of the budget deficit that we're facing I think a lot of responsible citizens would say

    okay I can sit in front of the computer for a little while

    and I just wanted to jump in on this discussion um I feel very differently from you on that matter

    and I just wanted to make sure that there were um that we could have a discussion about this rather than moving quickly to think

    about that because I think there are I think there are a lot of assumptions that are being made about voters when we

    start to think about changing something that people count on and there are many people who may not

    have access to digital resources absolutely and I think that um

    I think that before we you know consider this and encourage the director to

    potentially present that in front of the Board of Supervisors as a cost-saving measure that we should do we should in

    support some effort to ask communities what they think um before we make I mean that is one of

    the most important points of education for voters and I would be very careful before we start to

    transform it drastically that's excellent point but I think even if we could get half point of order point of

    order if you don't mind just like just raising the hand and also letting other

    folks respond to the the discussion as well so commissioner die go for it thank you

    um yeah so I think having public distribution sites like the libraries you know uh so people can pick up a hard

    copy if they want um you know making sure community centers have them uh and of course

    allowing people to opt in if they still want it I think that's all important but like I said if if even if we could

    reduce it by half I would think it would be significant savings and given how

    tech savvy the city is I think you know we have the potential of upwards of 70

    80 percent replacement um with the right campaign you know still

    making sure that we reach out to um you know communities that are don't

    have access to computers and are you know

    you know require uh for all kinds of other reasons that we can still accommodate both and also achieve the

    big cost savings so I just wanted to bring that up I do think that it when as

    I went through the whole budget it seemed like one of the biggest opportunities for cost savings

    everything else is kind of just around the edges but having said that

    around the edges I love that we're talking about increasing the grants I

    generally think Community groups are very effective but I also wanted to ask the question how are we holding them accountable there was a story in the

    paper recently about a 350 000 program that Bart spent to you know try to get

    homeless people into services and they served exactly one person for 350 000 so

    it's great that we want to spend the money are we asking the organizations the

    grantees are we tracking how many incremental people sign up if they actually voted do

    we have stats like that right so the rfps that criteria that the community organizations need to fulfill and then

    they need to provide the the substantiation that they met the criteria before we provide payment then if they

    provide let's say documentation that indicates that they partially fulfilled the criteria then we would give them

    less than the full amount and then going in we check each of the community groups

    status with the Attorney General's List of non-profits to make sure they're in

    good standing now there's an additional category where they could be uh not

    suspended but on probation I think it is before it's either you were they were

    they were good or they or they were suspended now there's a third category where they can still participate and

    receive funding so we we do the the due diligence prior to actually having an

    agreement and then after the agreement is is fulfilled we don't provide any funding until we get their reports and

    then we match the reports and and the information that they provide to the Criterion RFP and if they don't match

    what we agreed to then we don't provide the full funding to them and and then

    like I think I said it might have been both pack uh there are two groups that at this point haven't well actually one

    just did I think yesterday uh even provide the final reports to us so we haven't provided any funding and then

    you know even if they were to provide the reports and we provided we we've extended the time frame with these

    groups to provide the reports to us and so even if they do get a report back to

    us if we see that they have a met the criteria then they still wouldn't get the full funding under the the agreement

    great so I'm glad to hear that um I'm just reminded for the California

    citizens redistricting commission that you know the state blew like a million dollars on PR and didn't it did not

    result in a diverse pool which is what the intent was and most of the work and

    most of the actual Commissioners who got selected at the end were actually referred by Community organizations that

    were funded by an outside organization so all that state money that was spent didn't actually have a good result so

    I'm glad to hear that just going down in order of amounts that

    might make a difference so I understand the justification for the extra agility sorting system uh it makes sense that

    you would buy the same one as the ones you currently have um is that is there uh

    a competitive bid kind of situation for that or so only one manufacturer of this kind of sorting system or what's the

    situation with that well for the agilis uh we actually uh piloted that we're the

    reasons that jealous exists in some ways because we run back the company that provides it we gave them what we need

    and do our footprint we don't have a lot of space there are other scanners out there if we don't have space for them

    and so the agilis uh actually fits our footprint in City Hall and the scanner

    that we get at the warehouse it may not be an agilis depending on what's available if we get something that can

    do the job and is less costly than we would like consider that uh so it's

    really for us there's not a lot out there that we could incorporate into our footprint

    we've looked at it and um we are and we are looking at other

    ones now even after both you know I mentioned that or during public I mentioned so we

    are seeing what else is out there we're taking a look but um but we were to potentially stage out

    the warehouse would be in a Jailer or something along that size because most scanners are much larger than what we

    use um so yeah that's that's our Approach at right at this moment so

    sounds good uh a question about the [Music] um

    private poll sites uh versus I know there's a reference in

    the budget about SF USD sites reducing those I'm assuming that's because they require these extra security the

    additional costs for the sfusd side so so the reduction is because we have one less election

    so we're not we're not we're not so we we when we Precinct it after redistricting we did reduce the number

    of polling places uh by increasing the number of registered

    voters per Precinct essentially because everyone receives a ballot in the mail and so we're just not seeing a need

    because before the we had a average number of Voters per Precinct around 750 but now that voting is mostly done by

    mail uh We've we've we put the registered count at around a thousand

    okay you know so we're able to reduce the number by uh 70 or 87 uh polling

    places but still there's a polling place within five blocks really where everyone lives in the city still

    um so with representing after redistricting and one less election that's where the less use of sfusd sites

    comes in we still have a large we I can't remember the number I

    uh like it's like I want to say 70. there's a lot of sites that we use at our school still so

    and and when I was an inspector I know there

    were there were sites that were in people's garages that sometimes didn't have great lighting and and all that other stuff

    um is there a preference for public sites

    and City Sites as opposed to paying private garage owners that might not

    have the best facilities we I mean we like Brecken Park we provide funding to

    Wrecking Park and we have to pay overtime to their personnel to open up and close the sites so public sites

    aren't always less expensive than a private site actually they're usually more expensive to use

    um yeah I mean the first I mean right now we're actually now with this with this period we have no election in 2023

    we're actually reviewing all of our polling sites that we've we've used in the most recent elections taking surveys

    and they're really the first survey we take is accessibility and then we look at the slope uh the

    path of travel to the polling places uh could be we don't always have access to other sites but we look at the the

    slopes and the access to make sure they're within ADA requirements then

    also just just get a sense of of the of if it's still a good site to have in relation to other potential sites that

    are that are nearby yeah and then we we kind of build out from there it would be the the size of the site we do take into

    account lighting that's something that we do yes we can't see my ballot yeah

    and then but then you know sometimes you don't there's no choice you know and that's where the garage is coming

    there's I mean Outer Sunset there's just a lot of times there's no choices but but hopefully to have someone offer

    their garage for us to use a polling place as a pulling Place uh and then if it's a garage that has dim lighting that

    we'll we'll plan ahead to actually deliver uh supplemental lighting when when the equipment arrives so we we take

    that into account and then we provide mitigations when necessary okay great uh then a question about

    Vehicles back to the thing where you know public Vehicles might actually be more expensive than private ones do you

    take advantage of you know employees who have cars and just reimburse the mileage

    there was a discussion about Rental hours for vehicles I'm assuming

    during election day you probably need larger Vans or something like that yeah no we we don't ask uh Personnel to

    use their private vehicles in relation to election Services uh but we do try to

    more as much as we can to to maximize the use of the vehicles you know so

    the routing that we do to make sure that you know we're we know where the vehicle is going to go throughout the day uh at

    what times and then like the drop boxes The Devout drop-off box you know we it

    as we go on especially for the presidential election out that week before election day we'll be making two

    and if we see a flow of ballots in those boxes it might be three pickups a day

    and so we plan we might see that some have more more ballots being dropped off

    than others so we might adjust the route so yeah and then the size certainly uh with

    a lot of ballots that we'll be putting out of the polls on for the presidential election and then bringing back to the

    warehouse you know we'll have to have the larger Vehicles so as much as we can we maximize the use but there's also

    just a need for a lot of vehicles especially in election day yeah so okay and we do try to use City Vehicles as

    much as possible so uh Central shops there's Vehicles sometimes that we can borrow During certain uh time frames and

    so we we asked them and vans especially and then other other agencies too if

    they have vehicles that we can use we try to utilize those as much as possible so we're not we're not trying to rent

    everything but in the end we do have to rent a lot of vehicles for the election got it

    um a question about recovery uh it looked like there was a standard number to run elections for other agencies

    does it actually recover all of your costs your marginal costs burden costs

    what yeah the recovery is three we call reimbursement other than budget forms

    and uh so yeah so we actually calculate the cost for conducting the district

    elections uh so we do we do get our costs back I think uh for conducting

    let's say a Board of Education Election or a Bart election so okay

    great I think those were all the questions I had for director Arts I had questions

    for a question for OPEC did you guys consider upgrading our secretary position given

    how difficult it has been for us to fill that

    are you raising your hand or do you want me to speak well we will cover it on end

    yeah yeah but I'll speak to it um quickly this is President Stone

    um there is there was a discussion about it so if you want to watch the recording um that is available but I'm also going

    to provide an update on the secretary's position in the um in the

    commissioner's reports um but yes we did we did discuss that in

    boat back very briefly thank you

    oh I know you've spoken once let me just yeah that's what I was wondering do I let me just do you have questions or

    questions over here pertaining to the bedroom okay yeah I wasn't sure if I get to comment on someone or if I I also I'm

    not totally sure but commissioner Hayden Crowley you are called on because I will wait go for it um so uh the idea

    um director arms the idea of opting in I'm not in favor of it okay and and the

    reason is there's several reasons um lifelong voter in San Francisco that

    sort of Heralds the time that oh we're voting and I would also say I mean I

    question are there any jurisdictions across the United States that have gone digital because I don't think we need to

    be the test case for this number one and number two if we were to do something like this I would still stay say with

    stay with the opt out and I would take that money take a certain amount of money and invest it into a social media

    campaign to get people to see the wisdom of opting out because you'd actually be

    targeting people through social media that have computers as opposed to just making this blanket thing where

    everybody opts out and all of a sudden they don't get their voter pamphlet and then the other kind of like unintended

    consequences all of a sudden elevates all those people that put out those mailers because you count on the voter pamphlet

    to hopefully provide some sort of order to the whole uh voting system whatever

    and you get so many mailers and I'll quite honestly I throw them all in the waste basket but

    if I was going to get a voter Pam I mean if I wasn't going to get a voter pamphlet I probably would look at those mailers a little bit more carefully

    and um boy wouldn't they be thrilled so I I do think you know that there

    there is that issue of um outside influence gaining more

    influence because we're not providing the voter pamphlet so so there's that so

    I do think that we need to know if any jurisdictions have gone digital we don't need to be the first I'd love to see what other people are doing and I'd

    rather invest in social media campaign to encourage people to opt out because

    they will most of those people will have computers do I need to raise my hand


    so part of our the latter point I guess a lot so part of our public Outreach for this March and also for November will be

    to opt out so that's already in the plans and no I probably no one's gone

    digital for their voter guide that I'd be very surprised but the only what makes our book different it's so it's a book

    because of the paid arguments you know and one and one thing that back to your

    concerns about the ballot count so and then president Stone has mentioned this

    a few times as well were the board supervisors and I haven't had the conversation because I wanted to know what the card counts could be in our

    equipment uh so if the Border supervisors were to uh to uh authorize the listing and

    proponent opponents on on the local measures then that potentially is a paid argument

    and it took a not in the same but um so I wonder if that would

    also encourage people to opt out because they're getting the information that they seem that a lot of people seem to

    want from the voter guy and that's the paid arguments so then the ballots would include that information

    um yeah and these are all good points um I just for for me to not have to do

    the voter guide and those be wonderful yeah but these are all really good points and uh certainly it's an idea

    that you know there's there's you know ways to think about this some more and

    certainly more Outreach can happen on our on our side for people to opt out and potentially I think if people opt

    out that we still send a postcard of some type we still send some sort of noticing so they're alerted to the fact

    that their digital voter guide is available to them and we realize too A lot of people don't want to opt out

    because they don't want to give us their email address and they don't want to give us their email address because they're concerned the campaigns are

    gonna really contact them a lot and so that's also where this postcard

    idea can come in handy where people don't have to give us any information any an email address information and

    then they can still be alerted that the voter guide is available and they can they can access it online

    so yeah there's there's still a lot of thought around this time and certainly our next step that we are for certain going to take is messaging and finding

    ways that encourage people to opt out but still have have they have the information they receive the information

    that the book's available then they can start their election process with that information just a quick question in my

    house we have a lot of Voters and um uh we get the one California one why do we

    get why don't we just get one San Francisco one why did we get the ordinance so the the Municipal elections

    ordinance requires every voter in San Francisco to receive the the local voter information pamphlet so you

    can't there's there's no opportunity to make it a household uh pamphlet certainly yeah and that's a

    potential another step but then I you know I thought about that too and I think I don't know do I want to share your voter guide you know maybe I want

    my own voter guide so I can mark it up and there's there's a sample ballot in the voter guide as well so the state

    voter guide the state voter information guide does not have a sample ballot in it uh it's just it's just information on

    the measures and the candidate statements where our our information pamphlet includes the candidate

    statements uh the the paid arguments the and the the sample ballot and also that

    um that that voting uh table you know so you can mark your choices if you were to go to a polling place or just record how

    you want to mark your vote by mail ballot so there are some differences in our guide versus our pathlet versus the

    state guide that you wouldn't want to share I I I will share it I'll probably go digital

    too but I want that choice I don't want someone to make it for me yeah I understand yeah

    two other uh Commissioners have questions for the director

    I'll go oh sorry I'm vice president go ahead yeah I had one quick question then

    I had a couple comments um so during the perfect meeting I had asked if you

    um could let us know like around how many organizations had applied for the grant funding and then how many

    rewarded like did you were able to find that information oh 15 reward I I forgot

    to look to uh we I mean we we had an issue with three our three

    rfps to get enough organizations to actually uh participate in the grant

    program but I don't know the number I'll have to I'll have to come back together so what you're saying is that

    it could be like you may wear a large fraction of the applicants say again you

    you may be wording the um Grant to a large fraction of the

    applicants if if they're no just the opposite but I think I think that most of the applicants

    uh who were eligible receive grants because we didn't have a large enough pool yeah okay okay great

    um yeah and then just a couple quick comments um one one of the things we did at BowTech is we asked for a little bit

    more detail on the there were two of the dollar amounts in the table three there's the the three million dollar

    other Professional Services and then the four million dollar printing costs we

    I asked for a little bit more breakdown in that and director and provided it verbally

    and then the last thing I wanted to mention and this is something that I we didn't discuss at boatpec because I don't think it really affects the

    proposed budget but I think it's important for the commission to be aware aware of and I just want to highlight this is that in

    his budget memo he explains that the um the contract for the Dominion system is

    ending in March at the end of March of this year and so he's going to be extending it for

    two years which means it will then end at the end of March 2025 which is after

    the the 2024 presidential election so with this schedule

    um the plan is to issue an RFP um next in April 2024 which is about one

    year and two months from today and the reason I'm mentioning this is that it this would affect you know the

    the city's desire to move towards an open source voting system so I think it's something that we we would want to

    talk about at some point this year um you know because if we were to acquire a new system for for five years

    or something that could set us back um you know quite a ways away so I think it's something we we may want to discuss

    later this year that's all thank you thank you uh this is President Stone I

    had a few just comments and responses to some of the things that were raised

    um so about the Grant Community grant funding um I have a quest I have a comment and a

    question the first is um I was very happy to see that they were increased thank you just to give

    folks um insight into that because if they didn't have the opportunity to view any

    of the both pet conversation but the I have been in contact with a few Community groups who have said only

    amazing things about the program and um I I just wanted to add a specific

    personal note about this which is that um Community grants are incredibly

    effective and part of that is it's actually quite different from the one

    the story that commissioner die was Raising specifically because if you think about how Community like how

    resources are most effective when you're working with local groups being less paternalistic is actually more effective

    because Community groups know what their communities need and want um and so I

    would caution that we aren't overly focused on the accountability I think

    the reporting you know not providing report is a very cut and dry you know something that should and could be done

    so I'm not saying that but I just I want to express that it is uh we want it's a

    delicate balance to not be overly pushy about accountability and you know Roi

    and things like that um because it there is just a lot of research that shows when and actually if

    you look at the dynamic between non-profits and philanthropy philanthropy is moving away from having

    really restrictive fund requirements for a lot of these same reasons so I just wanted to kind of respond to that one

    question I had for the director pertaining to community grant funding is how you do you know you had mentioned

    that 15 were awarded I remember you'd mentioned to me that there were a couple of rounds of rfps how do you do Outreach

    with those communities like do you use a lot of the same Outreach that you're doing for elections to let Community

    groups know that this is an opportunity and also yeah I guess just that like

    what is the process of making sure that Community groups know that this is an option so we have a list of I think

    around I think it's around three four hundred organizations that we send materials and contact before every

    election right and so we we know that we noticed them then also we have to post the Grant on OC office of contract

    administration's website so it's public information just beyond the department and that's also a site where people who

    are seeking grant funding would know to go to all right um then I think in the past that we've

    we've issued press release I don't know if we did this this last round or not and there's uh

    and then also our Outreach team when they when they're when they interact with with the groups you know they're telling people there's grants

    and I think also there's just a lot of now also we've got momentum this is the third or fourth year we've been doing it

    so a lot of a lot of groups anticipate us issuing the the notices for the grant

    program before re-election cycle um thank you for sharing that I have one quick follow-up question

    um what is it is there also a I imagine there is the partnership in that regard

    with the office of Civic engagement in their the work that they do um I believe that there is so apologies

    for my ignorance yeah I'm pretty sure that we also share that with with that because we work with

    memory of election because they have they also have Community ambassadors they're different than the high school ambassadors uh so when we provide

    materials to the OC OCS Community ambassadors I think so when they're doing their their sidewalk

    um I'll reach and when they're also attending events then they're using taking our materials as well so I I

    would I want to say yes but I I don't know if we did this last round or not I'll have to find out okay no problem

    um and then the only other thing I was just going to mention um which director Owens had kind of alluded to that I wanted to just share

    with the rest of the commission um so as we're talking about the voter information packet the pamphlets

    um one thing that we had talked about which director Ernst had said the component of um the office the

    environmental Department um was the idea of having a um a place

    where people could return their voter information packet to recycle them at poll sites

    um and um you know it's it's just I think a creative way of us thinking about that

    footprint yes it's not going to necessarily uh save dollars um but I do think it's something that we

    could do to be creative with the element of how much paper we are wasting um well not wasting sorry

    um well that we are using to inform voters so I just wanted to provide some

    insight into what that was and that's it for me are there any further comments

    director arnsis or anything from you okay then let's move to public comment

    okay so I see uh two hands raised so I'll just go and

    um or three hands raised actually I'll just go and order here um first we have Mr Turner

    I'm unmuting you and Mr Turner you have three minutes whenever you begin yes uh

    thank you again and I appreciate the comments of the uh Commissioners regarding printing costs and printing

    contracts um one point I thought it appropriate to make on behalf of the public we wanted

    to reiterate an issue that was raised at bopek which is the sooner we can

    transition to the uh systems that have been directed by San

    Francisco county the sooner that we can start getting out of what is a basically a

    vendor lock-in contract with some obvious price gouging on behalf of the

    vendor not just Dominion but es and S and heart inner Civic in the uh vendors

    that control the grand majority of the current voter voting system Market the

    better the open source Community the

    non-profits involved project a cost savings to the jurisdictions moving in

    that direction of approximately 50 percent so

    um the the benefit of moving toward the

    more secure machines is not one only of security but also of a price cost

    savings thank you okay thank you

    next we have listed as Jacob I'm unmuting you

    have three minutes

    oh it looks like they may have just put their hand on oh

    figure out how to unmute myself um good evening everyone good evening Commissioners and director arens uh my

    name is Jacob Mata I'm a field organizer at San Francisco Rising um as a non-profit Community

    organization our mission is to ensure that marginalized communities can participate in Democratic process

    um and the Civic engagement institutions of our city voting is a fundamental way

    that communities of color and low-income communities can participate in having their voice heard in these policies that

    directly impact them in San Francisco um we've partnered with SF Department of Elections since the 2020 election

    um to ensure that low frequency voters in these communities have access to information provided by the department as well as receive the necessary support

    to vote in each election our Outreach work focuses on door knocking and calling voters who live in these

    precincts and neighborhoods that have the lowest rates of voting in the city these include the Civic Center Bayview

    Hunter's Point the mission in other parts of district 10 and 11. we support voters to make a plan

    um or by making a plan to vote explaining how voting works by mail are

    voting by mail works and also recruit voters to become poll workers we have experience in conducting photo Outreach

    programs in many languages such as English Spanish Tagalog and Chinese and

    we wholeheartedly support the efforts the department has made in recent years to prioritize Outreach funds

    um for these frequency voters and hope to see continued efforts leading up to the 2024 elections thank you for your

    time and your consideration okay thank you

    next we have MS gerardin I'm unmuting you you have three minutes

    uh just speaking in my personal capacity for this particular comment

    um I it is worth noting I do Communications for a living and I did serve on the city's ballot

    simplification committee writing uh the plain language ballot measure summaries that go into

    the voter information pamphlet so I I have a special place in my heart for that obviously mountain of paper that we

    get for each election um and you know I have to say while saving money can be a really good goal

    um budget crunch is a real thing I do want to encourage the Department of Elections and elections commission to

    get both expert and Community input into a decision of how to encourage people to

    opt out of receiving the voter information packet or at least the large version of

    um you know one thing that I always look at that pocket about again it's that brick of paper that

    arrives is it's a reminder it's an really something you can't ignore when

    it shows up in the mail um and contacting people more increases the chance that they will actually vote

    right we all know just because they register doesn't mean they vote just because they voted one time doesn't mean

    they vote the next time um and it would be terrible if an effort to save money cause voter participation

    to drop so my thoughts Echo some of what was said by the commission today one

    part of my recommendation is rather than getting people to opt out of the voter

    information pamphlet get them to opt into something else something smaller not sure I go small as a postcard

    because we've got a lot of those already so it'd be easy to not notice the one from the Department of Elections

    um and there are things like the sample ballot that people might miss another

    part is stick out expert in community inputs so you know there it's really thinking about the messaging and

    motivation that works for one group of San franciscans might not work for another

    um and we all have different things to motivate us uh and kind of to that is that expert piece so uh you know there

    are experts that may have already looked into this as was mentioned there may be jurisdictions that have done this

    um and some might just be thrilled to look at this is this something we should be doing as a best practice or not

    people get really excited about wonky stuff there's an organization called the

    center for civic design that does a lot of research into voter material design messaging and its effectiveness at

    engaging people to be voters I don't know offhand 30 seconds Civic design has

    looked at this particular issue but they'd take your call so uh reach out to

    them see if they know anything and you know think of ways to make this a

    decision that'll increase voting rather than discourage it thank you

    okay thank you next we have Danielle deibler

    am I meeting you you have three minutes

    so I'm gonna try this one more time

    Daniel Dave where I've unmuted you for real unmute me uh so I I understand

    I have three minutes I don't think I actually need three minutes but I'm gonna comment on something very similar to what Lauren did which is

    um I I do feel like uh the not sending out the

    you know the the paper guide I I'm definitely on board with the idea of

    trying to save the environment a little bit more and maybe not getting a 300 page guide for my voter guide I did opt

    out this year um but I would I really do think that what we learned during covid especially

    with a lot of uh younger people was that not everybody has universal access to

    the internet and universal digital access and so that guide might be the

    thing that they use to make the decision about how they're going to vote or the thing that reminds them about voting so

    really taking a a an approach where we study the best

    way to reach all of the voters in the city will increase actually voter voter

    output and you know voters showing up at the polls or voting early and I I do

    feel like we really need to be very considered in making that decision it I don't think it's worth

    saving money is not a good goal in this particular case it it more sense to make

    sure that people participate in the Democracy in the city and that's it thank you

    okay thank you

    so that is all the public Hunters thank you vice president jordanick I um

    let's move on to agenda item number six the director's report discussion and

    possible action regarding the February 2023 director's report and I will hand it over to director Ernst my group

    president's dad so we've already covered the I'll just do the highlights here so I mentioned the the budget

    um we have started I saw that your website's already been moved to the new format we've started the process we'll

    start our content uh production next week working with digital services and

    then we'll we'll start the we'll we'll have the new site live in in May of this

    year and then also since the last meeting uh

    there was a vacancy that's occurred on the Retirement Board so we'll be running a uh a retirement election which is not

    currently in our 2223 budget uh but we'll run that and then on the last page

    or although page three we met we mentioned again the RFP that we're using the remaining funds from this past

    election uh to for Community groups that do Outreach to the Justice involved and

    so I just want to highlight that so there's hundred thousand dollars that that's available and as a part of this

    RFP and no more than fifty thousand dollars going to an individual grantee and then from there I can I can take


    any questions oh I'm sorry commissioner burn holes had her hand raised thank you thank you president Stone uh

    thanks director Arns I don't know if this question fits here or in the previous section but I'll ask it anyway

    I'm just wondering I think a year or so ago we discussed the potential

    um damage to the pier where all the elections commission equipment is stored

    and I'm wondering how it did during the recent uh our inaugural experience with

    significant climate change related damage

    so the so what do you call that the atmospheric rivers that go through

    actually it held up really well I don't know if it was the direction of the window but we did get some seepage under

    some of the doors but there wasn't any flooding and structurally we haven't noticed anything

    as far as the peers on which the warehouse sits uh being unstable

    um and then so right now right now I I we we've not experienced any any changes

    in the site due to the storms or or any any sort of uh Rising water related

    issues good thank you you're welcome

    commissioner Parker um I just uh I had one thing and actually

    before I do this just point of information um did we need to vote on the budget that we just talked about or no is is

    there not approval needed by the commission I don't this is President Stone I don't

    believe we do need to vote but I will actually punt that over to director arts and DCA Flores

    well the the chart indicates that the commission must approve the Department's budget and that it requires two public

    hearings so I don't know if that requires a vote but thank you this is President Stone I thought it was just a

    review so um I guess my I wanted thank you

    commissioner burger for raising that DCA floor is if we've already closed the previous agenda item

    how can we go back and make a take action on it in terms of the vote

    um you did have open um public comment um so you can just reopen the last

    agenda item and make a motion I mean it's up to you if you want to take public comment again but since you

    already took public comment um and you do have discussion and possible

    action labeled as the budget as the agenda item so the public did know that there was going to be some kind of

    action so I uh you know at this point just open up the agenda item and make the motion and take the vote okay thank

    you and thank you commissioner Parker and apologies to everyone um that was my misunderstanding so

    um just briefly uh let's go back to uh agenda item number five discussion and

    possible action on the Department of Elections 2023-2025 budget and I will open it up if anyone like would like to

    make a motion a move that we approve the um the budget

    is presented second great uh I think because we already took

    public comment on this item we don't need to take it again um let's just move straight into the

    vote vice president jordanick yes

    commissioner bernholz yes commissioner die yes commissioner Hayden Crowley yes

    commissioner lebowsi yes commissioner Parker yes and I present Stone vote Yes

    so with that we now officially have closed agenda item number five and are moving on to agenda item number six

    directors report and I will hand it back over to commissioner Parker to resume

    her questions and comments thank you very much um a lot of the questions that I had

    were related to the budget and were already brought up by other Commissioners and so the one just note I wanted to make I really appreciate the

    detail I'm you know learning I appreciate all the detail you're putting in in these documents for me as a new

    commissioner um one note uh on the the section you talked about the racial Equity updates

    that will be due and the requirement for us to add our

    notes you know whatever we want to do to have added to that by May and so I just wanted to note that we should perhaps

    agendaize that in our next meeting to start discussing in some way or take some action on that so this is President

    John I'm glad you brought that up uh I actually will be um

    and I don't know if I'm allowed to do this here but my I had that noted as a comment as well for this agenda item

    however I also am going to be calling a bopack meeting for the next hopefully

    next quarter where um that will I am asking for that to be

    a top agenda item that can be more of a a walkthrough of the document that vice

    president jordanick and I spoke about last time so I think per commissioner Parker's comments

    um it would be best if we have bopack do the initial work

    with enough time for the commission to then uh review and approve it before

    that May 8th deadline um I I'm hopeful folks agree but I

    definitely open it up to discussion as well thank you

    and feel free to keep going no that that was it I um I actually have had a lot of my questions answered just through the

    previous discussion thank you thank you

    vice president Jordan yeah I just said one question I also was going to ask about the the same item but I think it

    was fleshed out enough um yeah direct currents I just had one

    question under Roman numeral 2D where you talk about the the updates you're

    going to make to different parts of your website and one of the things you mentioned is the election results page and I was

    wondering if you were planning on um trying to take a look at some of the

    long-term suggestions that we were discussing in a BowTech meeting last year where one of them was to maybe

    somehow include the ring true sweating results within the body of the summary page so

    it's continued you're open to working on or planning on working on uh we can look at it so the results page is not on the

    SF gov site it's an SF election so it's right it's a different it'll be pulled in

    um certainly we can take a look at that again great okay um thank you

    any is that all uh vice president jordanick is that awesome thank you

    do other Commissioners have questions or feedback with director

    I will then um just ask I had two

    questions um and I I too did not know if this question should go in the budget item or

    here um so bear with me um so as it pertains to the

    um preposition H that changed our elections um in 2020 to 2024 and

    understanding how long our ballots will be notwithstanding what the Board of

    Supervisors decides to do as opposed as it pertains to the proponent's art arguments um

    I wondered if and I am certain you are already thinking about this and departments already think about this but

    the additional Outreach and messaging required to not just educate voters

    about the changes but also preparing them for maybe longer like a longer uh

    lead time before results can be reported because with you know a longer you know

    a longer card and all the processing and especially if you have to use manual envelope opening it will take longer to

    get those results um out to voters so I just I imagine you guys are already thinking about this but

    um wanting to ask if that's something you're already planning to do in terms of Outreach yeah yeah we'll make it well

    known I think we'll have to get off the balance yeah we're thinking about that and going in and as we go through it

    we'll make it known that dude you know depending on the circumstances where we are as far as the counting is concerned

    then release the results so awesome yeah I I just remember not just in San Francisco but nationally there's this

    intense focus on no results on Election night it's going to take a while and now I'm just thinking about how long our the

    San Francisco ballots will be in 2024 and making sure that expectation is appropriately set yeah which I'm sure

    you're already I'm thinking about so I just actually had a question for my own understanding it's on page three

    um section 4C so the timeline for mailing of voter notices which will

    allow return notices to be processed so I just want to make sure I understood that does that mean that there is voter

    notices that if you get a return actually why don't I why don't I

    actually before I try and translate it we explain to me what that sentence actually means

    um in turn it's it's sorry for sorry yeah 4C the Departments begin drafting a

    time and prevailing a voter notices which will allow returns notices to be processed yeah I I think I was trying to

    understand the implication in terms of the voter role so there's sort of two ideas I think

    that that one the one sense so we'll send those out we have a schedule of

    notices that we issued before every election then we'll start earlier for the March election than we do for most

    elections part of the reason is because of the of the the parties the the some

    parties allowing nonpartisan voters to vote in those parties for those parties presidential uh candidates and we'll

    issue the the notices and the and we will probably issue more than one notice

    too on that topic and the more time that we give ourselves to get those back as

    return mail then we can update people's records so we don't send them a second notice then also we don't send them a

    ballot so that's that's what that means okay good I'm glad that I asked because

    I misunderstood it entirely because I've been just thinking about voter rolls and how those are maintained um that's it

    from me um just another thank you for the addition of the grant funding increase

    which was on the first page of your report so thank you are there any further questions for

    the director okay let us move to public comment

    okay um well let's I guess kind of take the public comments in the room first sorry Hi

    um okay so I don't know if this is allowed but I have more of a question than a comment um I think it's a great idea that the

    net that the Arts commission be involved in the decision for the I voted sticker but um uh

    I mean they would obviously know best um so will they be making the decision about how that sticker is sourced and if

    so if there was a member of the public who was very invested in the outcome of this like had some thoughts ideas maybe

    a presentation how would they reach out to that the commission to

    weigh it or give thoughts on that thank you so I am not certain that we

    can provide an answer directly via public comment but um having your feedback on record is is


    hi Jeffrey Whitton San Francisco I'd like to advocate for some sort of democratic process in the selection of a

    new I voted sticker whether that be an open submission or an RFP process with opportunity for Community involvement it

    seems to me that the voters should be able to weigh in on the sticker that they will wear to identify themselves as

    a proud San Francisco voter thank you thank you yes so can I even though we're not can I

    yeah all right tell me if I'm I mean so

    is that my suggestion okay cool thank you clarify yeah thanks so so the idea

    the the initial thinking is that the Arts commission would be the conduit for the Department to potentially bring in a

    new sticker uh nothing's been finalized I have not formally asked the Arts

    commission yet uh I did contact the city attorney's office they've been in discussion uh with uh the deputy City

    attorney Flores with her counterpart at the Arts commission so we're trying to think of the mechanics first before we actually bring anything forward so no

    like I said during uh I think it might have been the budget or my somewhere along the way uh so we're thinking about

    the funding aspect or the budget so we're thinking about the funding aspect if there's commission were to be

    involved and the reason that I'm talking about now is we have to put something in our budget now even though the plan's

    not set so that that that's the timing issue we have here but there is there is there there's no plan yet there's

    there's nothing that's been said uh still no open idea and you know it's we

    learn more we'll share it and certainly the department will be I don't think they can decision on the design we want

    the public input and uh so yeah there's a lot to be determined yet so

    um commissioner Hayden Crowley may make one more suggestion um maybe working also with the library because they just

    do such a fantastic job of promoting and they're so widely dispersed around the

    city and they love contests and I just think this is going to be really fun yeah

    thank you let's resume public comment peace we're moving to the public

    comments online and I do not see any hands raised

    great well let's move on to the item number seven

    Commissioners reports uh discussion and possible action and commissioner's reports for topics not covered by

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

    Planning Commission activities and areas of study propose legislation which affects elections and others so I have a

    few updates I will actually handed over to commissioner dye to

    pick it off and then I will run through mine after thank you president Stone

    um so I had attached to this item the uh

    hot offs the press report the promise of fair Maps without any expectation that everyone

    would have read every page of it uh it was really to just it's an early

    early homework for the next meeting where Commissioners Lucy and I will

    attempt to answer any questions that are remaining that are burning

    commissioner bernholz had brought up a couple of issues at the last meeting so

    we will provide I'm sure additional homework to try to address those

    and I'm open to feedback on that I was thinking of inviting the author of this

    report if he's available or someone from one of the sponsoring good government

    groups to be available to answer questions um at our March meeting so that we can

    kind of make that our last educational session for the commission for the

    public with the idea that we would start soliciting public proposals in April and

    have uh public hearing probably outside of a normal meeting

    just so that we can focus on it and um have time to do some Outreach to let

    people know that we're soliciting and interested in hearing from the public on

    complete proposals or comments and opinions on particular aspects of

    proposals that they think should be incorporated in any kind of final reform that goes before the Board of

    Supervisors so that's all I had commissioner levolsi

    do you have anything to add commissioner Hayden Crowley so who's writing the proposal for the proposal

    so I I know that there is at least the the unity map Coalition has indicated to

    me that they are working on a specific proposal

    um and had therefore asked about the timing of when we were going to have this public hearing so I think April

    will work well so I know there's going to be at least one specific proposal and

    I know that they have reached out to good government groups to try to coordinate uh and because they are a coalition of

    what 50 to 80 organizations they have to get agreement among themselves before they present to us but you know

    we also want to make sure to reach out through the media and our other channels and I'm going to ask director arts for

    help from your Outreach team to let you know Community ambassadors know that the

    commission is interested in hearing from them but their thoughts on our past redistricting process what they would change moving forward so that we can

    invite as many people as possible to come and address us at a special publishment well I think clarification

    is that don't we don't don't we create

    criteria for the proposal what are our expectations that the proposal will include I mean like an RFP I mean

    basically uh I mean what do they get out of it for doing the proposal

    well I think what we had discussed as a group is that that we would hear from the public and

    and then opine on the proposals that we received so that there would be something that we as a commission

    would feel comfortable moving forward to the Board of Supervisors and it might be we love it

    we like it as is or we like it with these caveats or

    you know what have you because we're not in the business of actually drafting legislation ourselves

    um but I do think that our opinions having studied this now for more than six months uh

    you know we'll have great weight uh and I know that uh the organizations that are

    planning to put forward specific reform proposals will be lobbying on their own

    okay I would just like to make a suggestion that you you're so good with the um matrixes or whatever they are

    that I I really do think that you have to codify the process um so that you manage expectations I

    just think that you know you gotta have the steps you got to have the dates and you know we can massage it later on but

    just so that uh we know where we're going we need a road maps this feels this feels very

    amorphous to me and I think it needs I think it needs more structure

    um and so far it's been really enlightening but I know you're moving on to this next level and I just think we

    need a a pretty specific road map so so we can manage expectations not just for

    us but also for the people that we're engaging with so that they know what to

    expect fair enough um commissioner levolsi and I will work on an update to our redistricting

    initiative document we're on V3 I think we'll do a V4 that has the next set of

    steps for the commission to look at in March point of information as you had

    said something uh commissioner sorry this President Stone uh commissioner die you had said something about a public

    something about April with a public meeting or I think I was confused about the timing would you mind explaining

    what you were saying and providing a little bit more context yeah so uh so we were thinking that

    March meeting would be the time you know hopefully we'll have a uh maybe

    the author of this report uh be available for Q a uh to kind of address

    any final questions that Commissioners had issues that you wanted to dig into a

    little bit deeper we had a couple of questions from commissioner burnholtz

    last time that we'll make sure to provide some more information on but I'm sure in the discussion people might have

    more questions so the idea is that we'll use March as kind of our clean up final you know

    ask it now you know uh clarification uh study meeting

    uh so that by April that we would be ready to hear from the public on what

    they want to see and what their specific proposals are uh and my thinking at this point

    um our thinking was that that we have this at a special hearing that's outside

    of the normal meeting so that we dedicate a session because we don't know how many proposals

    we're going to hear and we don't want it to bog down a regular April meeting

    um did anyone have anyone that's so this is uh president Stone just to respond to

    those thoughts so I I think there is a lot of value in having a special hearing

    I wonder if it is a little premature to have it in April though um just based on what you were saying

    about the unity Coalition and where they're at um and I think maybe this is part of

    what commissioner Hayden Crowley was gonna like I think having a clear defined like timeline

    um outside of just you know next month and then the following month of you know what community groups should be

    providing um the commission whether it's you know we don't have to necessarily provide like criteria

    um or you know maybe we do as commissioner Hayden Crowley suggested um but maybe just saying you know this

    is our suggestion that you provide a report and enough we can provide the

    public enough notice to review said reports and then provide an open forum

    for the public to then you know Advocate or not in support of one or the other

    um I think I feel a little unsure if April is too soon uh to do that um and

    perhaps it would just be you know a little bit of U.N commissioner volsi kind of working through that but I

    personally think April would just not be enough time for anyone to draft you know

    like even if it is the unity group does have theirs by April would it allow other groups to come forward and bring

    something competitive as well and so if we could say Hey by April we're going to send Community groups what we want to

    see and maybe that's what it is and then we say okay maybe sometime in July and

    I'm just talking off the fly here but giving folks enough time I know that we

    want to strike while the iron's hot but I also think giving people time including ourselves to read all of that

    material and be able to schedule a public a special meeting and I just

    think that would be my that would be my um piece of feedback

    anyone else I actually I I agree with that um

    in the spirit of inclusivity you know and making sure that there is and I and I like the idea of having a clear a

    clear expectation of what we're hoping from people because there might be some folks who are who are very organized and have a you know massive thick proposal

    book whatever they want to give us um and there might be others who don't understand what we're looking for to propose and so being able to make room

    for all of the ideas that might be really valuable for how San Francisco wants to consider this in the future I

    think would be good so um I do I do like that idea of you all coming up with a very clear process what

    are we looking for what would you bring to us and when um and then that time I mean I have been

    part of efforts like this in the past where it takes a long time to get to consensus with the group if you're

    really trying to build a coalition um and so it seems unlikely in my

    experience that in a month you know people could get us what we need you know if we tell them even after the next meeting in in March like you have a

    month and then you have to present it um that that would make me nervous as somebody who has worked with Community

    groups and coalitions before so I concur with that comment

    s commissioner die yeah so just to be fair these Community organizations have

    been working on this since May of 2022 so it's not like they just because we've

    taken this long to go through an educational process doesn't mean that they weren't on it

    um so uh so I think we will probably say

    at least one full proposal but I I think we want to be open to people just opining on one thing like I could

    totally see someone who just wants to talk about the size of the commission and representation from districts for

    example and not really have a lot to say about anything else uh I mean we found

    that a lot with the CRC as people would have one issue they were really concerned about and they didn't really

    have a comment on any other piece of it uh but you know we had a special day for

    Community organizations to give full proposals because they had thought through all of the details and how they

    interact with each other and you know had um we even more time for that reason

    whereas Normal public comments three minutes right so if you only wanted express your opinion great uh but actual

    proposals take time and I my thinking is that we would allow for a series of

    public hearings I was just suggesting that April might be the start of it but I I also am a little concerned and

    commissioner Wolsey and I are going to meet on this um in the coming weeks to kind of hash this out a little bit I do want to make

    sure there's enough time to have Outreach to groups who have not

    been quite as involved as this one particular coalition to you know go reach out to Neighborhood associations

    and other other groups who participated that may not have been watching things

    since the redistricting task force stopped meeting but you know there's probably contact information

    through the rdtf and all the people who gave public comment and you know at minimum we should notify them that in

    case they haven't been paying attention that for the past you know eight months we have been looking at this and we're we're going to be soliciting proposals

    so so so I'm thinking we might have actually a series of public hearings

    um but uh it's all with the idea that we are shooting to get finished legislation

    and from the Board of Supervisors that can make it onto a ballot and so we'll probably work backwards from that deadline so so yeah we'll work a more

    specific plan commissioner Hayden Crowley um one more thing I would you know if

    you want to reach out to the community groups there's no better spot than the Board of Supervisors to each of those

    individuals represents a district and they have relationships with all of those their Community groups and if you

    want to get this thing passed you got to keep them abreast of everything that you're doing and you can start with the president but

    then work and ask for his help and then work with all the different supervisors and how you want to approach that but

    um definitely you want to give them advance notice that you're doing this and what you're doing and why you're doing it and try to build support for it

    that way thank you

    thank you commissioner dye and commissioner Hayden Crowley um and commissioner ovulsey does anyone else

    have a commissioner's report that they would like to make yeah uh vice

    president jordanick yeah thank you president Stone I I did want to say something about the website but unless you're already going to say something

    about it I I was just no go for it I'll add my comments okay yeah so in case

    people didn't notice if you're watching today you must have noticed but um we did make the transition to the new

    SF gov platform and that was switched over on Friday evening

    and I would just say that it seems to have gone smoothly but if anyone has any

    suggestions if something doesn't look right or if something's missing or can be improved I would just suggest that

    that person maybe email or president and then um and then I think she's you're also going

    to be learning how to update it as well yes so that's all thanks thanks vice president jordanick and for your

    help um with that transition generally um anyone else before I jump in

    okay so I included a handful of items and I'm going to try and not spend too

    much time on these a couple or of items are just notices

    um and then um I imagine there may be some additional questions on some but just to

    kind of kick it off I included the letter I submitted to the head of HR

    just providing official notice that we as a commission in the last meeting officially renewed director John arnd's

    contract for an additional five years and so I wanted everyone to see that in

    the public and um and congratulate director arnst as well

    um that was number one number two are the bylaws so I included uh the bylaws

    which I imagine everyone has read but there are a couple things I wanted to share as I went through and really

    spent some time with the bylaws and and there are three main areas that I want

    to focus on today so one is Robert's Rules of Order so in the bylaws

    article 12 it states that the commission

    will follow the most up-to-date Roberts rule so I put together I I made the the

    error in purchasing the entire book and learning as much of it as I could and

    also watching uh many YouTube videos um so I feel that I have some sense

    though as you can tell there are some Kinks getting worked out but the general idea is that this document that I

    provided is just to help facilitate our meetings you know I've been a proponent

    for not having very very very late meetings and so my hope is that the way

    that we're doing this will allow us to be more efficient but also respectful I

    want to be I think there are ways that Robert's Rules can be really helpful in ensuring that we're giving everyone the

    opportunity to speak in a fair way and you know practicing

    I don't love to use this word in this context but for lack of a better word at decorum in just the way we treat each

    other which I had mentioned a couple of times last year I think could be improved and so I'm hopeful that

    Robert's Rules will help and I there are two other items as it

    pertains to Robert's rules that I included Beyond just how meetings are run and that is about the agenda so

    you'll notice one of them is the agenda you'll notice that the agenda is a little bit different in terms of its

    order and it will kind of be this way moving forward the administrative components of our meetings will be first

    so obviously the roll call and um and the land acknowledgment and

    public comment but then moving into director and commissioner reports will

    come immediately after and then we'll go into kind of standard business meaning things that are a continuation from

    previous meetings or have been discussed in other meetings and then the inclusion of new business so things that have not

    really been brought up as a commission discussion before um really formally we'll come after that

    um and then obviously agenda items for future meetings so that will generally be the structure I wanted to provide

    transparency into that um just so you all know I also um wanted to have more of a process

    around agendizing so folks had Clarity um around you know if you aren't sure in

    the meeting uh in a February meeting of something you want to talk about in March you don't necessarily have to

    bring it up at the February meeting there can be time to you know formally ask to have it included in the in the

    next meeting the last the second piece of it was meeting minutes so I alluded

    to this a little bit earlier but uh obviously vice president jordanick and I

    have been managing the minutes while we've been while our secretary's position has been vacant and through

    that experience and re-watching five hour long meetings and trying to record

    those media minutes I did spend some time reading through Robert's Rules and also read through the

    Sun the related Sunshine um ordinance uh uh kind of piece on our

    minute on minutes and I just wanted to state for everyone's knowledge that our

    minutes are not intended to be transcripts we do of course record our meetings and we vice president jordanick

    kindly posts them onto YouTube for uh public viewing and so just to make sure

    everyone knows our minutes are just a record of actions taken we do include

    public comment names to the best of the our ability and also the Direction with

    which folks support or Advocate or oppose certain things those are all kind

    of summarized and also other um hello look speakers but there's more information in the packet if folks have

    a different additional questions feel free the last thing I'll say about Robert's Rules is it's not intended to be this like stringent process I want to

    be you know conscious that this isn't you know a this is a democratic body uh

    and it's really just to help help us and if there's more interest in training

    um outside of the few pages I put together of a 600 page book

    um I would welcome that for all of us um so I'll pause on Robert's Rules and then I have a couple other updates

    pertaining to the bylaws just to see if folks have any questions or requesting information pertaining to

    that uh commissioner level thank you for

    doing all that work oh absolutely absolutely because you're hating growing I just want to thank you for taking the

    lead on this I think that I've just it brings a lot of order to the meeting and it really helps in terms of creating a

    calmness and that's what Robert's Rule supporters is intended to do so thank you for doing this you're welcome thank

    you I'm glad folks I'm glad folks have positive uh sentiment around it yep DCA

    Flores yes this DCF Lawrence um I do want to point out that other commissions

    um notably I think the police commission has elected or chosen one of their members as a parliamentarian

    to keep the meeting flowing and like like what you're doing today so that's

    something that you guys can consider as well in the um in the thank you to see

    if Laura's in the document I put together I listed the so there's usually a chair um and I had the president has listed

    that but if folks have concerns around it um I definitely welcome that feedback

    um so let's kind of keep it in our back pocket if we want to change that and if folks feel like you know I'm I

    that this those responsibilities can be distributed um not all in one that's totally I'm

    open to that um okay so there were two other items pertaining to the bylaws that I wanted to mention uh so the so just a kind of

    it's more just a comment um so as I was going through the bylaws I also identified several areas that I I

    believe we can do a better job at um documenting and templatizing around

    processes there were specific things that I did not know that we were required to do for our bylaws that we

    aren't doing that as we're thinking about bringing on a new secretary ensuring that they're very clear about

    that and so this is really an invitation for the commission and members of the public to

    um to provide input on processes that you think should be improved I think the

    number one thing that we have all agreed on in many different moments is the onboarding process to to the commission

    fortunately we have a full body now which is great but um that I know that

    that is probably what everyone is thinking about but if there are other processes and templates I can't commit

    to being able to do them immediately but just having a running list of how we can just operate better and and also empower

    the next body after us to not have to go through this process themselves

    um so I invite folks to participate in that and then the last one was a specific item on article 6 section 1B

    and it's actually pertaining to the director's participation and so as we had

    had several very late meetings obviously over the last year in 2022 one of the

    items that I realized in the bylaws that we are allowed to do is not require

    director Arts to stay for the entirety of our meetings and so

    um ultimately I can make that call but I wanted to just share it with all of you

    as um you know any concerns being raised but my my feeling my personal feeling is

    unless entirely necessary where a specific agenda item requires director

    arts's input or presence or you know should a commissioner you know I still

    believe commissioner should be able to can request if necessary for a specific agenda item that after the reports of

    the commission and Commissioners and director that I don't believe that the his attendance should be mandatory so

    that those are my three updates as it pertains to the bylaws um I I promise my other ones are a

    little shorter but I wanted to open up if anyone has any questions about those specifically

    or concerns okay great um so the last couple of things are the

    um the website which vice president jordanick um kindly shared so one of the things

    that I also wanted to add to that is potentially pushing this to a bopek

    meeting is what what we would want to see on the website so one thing that was raised in

    public comment uh in the fall was that we are we only have one language

    accessible on our website which I think we could improve on that

    um and you know other things we've talked about is having strategic priorities outlined past reports

    documentation so things that we could have bopac really dive into and provide

    recommendations to the commission one of the big things that I see as an area of

    opportunity and again would push this to bopack is is um and I raised this during bopek in August of 2022 is including

    demographic information as self self-identified so you know each member would be able to you know I wouldn't

    choose it for you you get to decide how you would want to be identified um perhaps I have a couple of

    recommendations I've I've seen how for example the Harvey Milk Club does their website has some pretty cool graphs

    um in terms of how they share their uh demographic information and also just the about us you know each

    commissioner can have their own individual page so these are just things that we can think about in the context of how we want to be have presence in

    the public but also thinking about transparency from a racial Equity

    perspective as well and then the last piece is um uh vice president jordanick did

    mention that I am going to get trained on how to post and if anyone else on the commission would like to be trained

    um please definitely let me know or rather vice president jordanick as

    well um yes commissioner Hayden Crowley

    sf.gov has a toggle where you can actually have anything translated to I

    mean I know that I did that with the sheriff's it was translated to the to the various languages that are the

    there's like five languages director aren't this in their child there's three there's characters we

    Chinese and the Spanish and Filipino yeah and so I I think that you can't accept if it's a PDF

    that's great I appreciate you clarifying that and I imagine vice president jordanick already knew that as well uh

    did you already did you know I don't know if that's true okay I built that into that I actually built that oh it's

    like a capability that we had to offer just opt into I believe I mean they're so focused on

    accessibility.gov I have to believe that that's just the capability okay um

    yeah absolutely well thank you for raising that and um can definitely check

    on that unless vice president I don't know if you have additional comments yeah I think my understanding is that

    you would have to request the pages that you want translated because it's not like an automated thing but um but they

    do have the capability to to talk it's built into Drupal there's a there's a um there's a uh what do you

    call those things it's like an add-on or whatever and you can you can click it on to the

    language right they're not translating they're going to be putting in the the little

    um well I guess my understanding was that they said you have to request to have the pages translated but I could be

    wrong but oh okay and I don't know why they would do it that way but they could all right I apologize no no problem

    um thank you commissioner Hayden Crowley and vice president Jordan uh commissioner Parker uh just for clarity

    I know you want to put this on a different agenda so it won't belabor the point but you can't there are those four

    languages English Spanish Chinese characters and um uh Filipino are all in the top right

    hand corner of our new website it's beautiful I just clicked on all four you can see all of them all of our

    information is is translated right there so that's already done and the presentation last month I do recall that

    same thing about PDFs and you know for screen readers all of those reasons which I know the city's really focused on and so I think it's good for us to

    keep asking those questions because they're really important especially for things like this for elections information but

    um it is there just to let everybody know wonderful thank you commissioner Parker commissioner Hayden Crowley I

    really appreciate that were there any other comments pertaining to that awesome so I just had uh one last piece

    which is I know everyone's top question which is around the commission secretary I did interview two candidates

    um uh today actually and working to interview hopefully at least initial an

    additional uh candidate and basically to answer a question that was raised by

    commissioner die earlier as it pertains to the budget It ultimately just didn't make sense to

    try and find someone to fill this position right now only to then change the classification and then have you

    know then go through a different recruiting I mean the the implications from an HR perspective were actually

    more challenging than what was what yeah so um ultimately I've been trying to

    just like focus on getting us the the urgent item and we did have 19 folks

    apply and um I there is some discussion about kind

    of uh it's a work in progress um and uh commissioner Hayden Crowley

    has kindly agreed to help uh deputyize some of this as well mostly because

    um uh not to say that anyone was isn't phenomenal I commissioner Hayden Crowley

    has a lot of experience obviously in San Francisco city government and a lot of

    relationships and knows I mean there are a couple times where I think when I was sick last month I was reaching out to

    her asking her who do you know how do I this so it it will help expedite hopefully things that I definitely do

    not have insight into yet commissioner Hayden Crowley you know I know John Arts he can help oh

    um I mean I read that report where you uh

    hired two people at the 11th hour and you somehow uh being you know pulled

    rabbits out of the hat to fill these incredible positions that required all this training and you managed to do it

    and everything you can help us with get us as secretary you must know your way around DHR pretty well and mayor oral

    requisitions thank you commissioner Hayden Crowley

    um I will also open it up for anyone who has questions pertaining to the yeah commissioner died so

    um do you believe the applicant pool is sufficient are we still looking for candidates how can we help

    um not so much that to answer the last question there's nothing really other than kind of patience with me

    um in the process I think one of the things that I learned as I went along was that

    I wanted to know the process and it was a process that we as a commission maybe

    didn't know that we had to follow and so I am learning that as I'm trying to also

    get the secretary and then trying to also like you know complete the training and all the things that are required in

    order to actually interview folks which I did not know up front so that's the long-winded way of saying nothing at

    this point commissioner Hayden Crowley has offered to help I spoke with her earlier today about it actually and

    um I do believe that we have some good candidates I can't say right now if we

    won't want to open it up again but um for right now I think it's it's moving and I know that this is

    a top priority I am committed to getting us a secretary

    anyone else okay so thank you for your patience and

    walking through my many many um reports next time there won't be so many

    I'm hopeful let's move to public comment on agenda item number seven commissioner's reports

    okay so I see uh two hands raised so first I will

    unmute um Lauren gerarden uh you'll have three minutes

    great thank you hi yeah this is Lauren gerardin again this time speaking on

    behalf of the League of Women Voters of San Francisco thank you commissioner die

    for bringing that report forward uh it is hot off the presses I haven't even

    read the whole thing yet so I have some homework to do as well um if you need help contacting anyone

    we're happy to help it I think you can probably find them uh they're really

    responsive right now about the report no surprise and the rest of my comment no surprise is about your redistricting

    discussion um so as someone who was deeply involved and that is an understatement I feel in

    the redistricting process more time yes please um you know one of the reason more time

    really matters is for those Community groups that you want to engage in the process and this is something

    uh that I feel like the redistricting task force fell short because of this in

    their community outreach um they did not allow enough time for community outreach but also the time for

    Community to respond to the Outreach part of that is because groups have their own meeting Cadence it's usually

    monthly sometimes it's gosh every other month and it's often an on an immovable schedule particularly when there are

    multiple groups contributing to a collaborative proposal like this it could take weeks to get things drafted

    circulated revised and through the levels of approval in each of the groups and if your organization is volunteer

    driven uh say like the league it might take longer um it kind of depends on

    whether the volunteers are around so for example I'm on vacation in the spring so

    uh so you know and I'm leading this thing for us so you know the other thing

    uh about that too is newsletters um so you mentioned there was a mention of the Board of Supervisors doing

    community outreach they have they do a lot of that Outreach through their newsletters which go out monthly it's

    usually towards the beginning of the month so if you missed their production schedule you have to wait till the next month for the news to get out and a lot

    of other community groups have a similar Cadence and one of the things that I learned really well during the

    redistricting process was those groups that engage people who are not always online those folks that you really do

    want to do more Outreach for they're meeting their folks in person they're hap waiting for the in-person meetings

    they're maybe doing phone calls or maybe sprinting a flyer and so those groups

    need even more time especially so if you're looking to engage folks who aren't digitally Savvy or digitally

    accessible more time is going to be so much better for this process so thank you for taking

    this on and can't wait to see the next steps okay we've got two people with their

    hands raised next we have Mr Brent Turner

    you have 30 seconds sorry

    three minutes thank you uh Vice chair gerdomik and vice president Giordano uh

    Brent Turner um speaking uh I'm with the RV milk lgbtq anti-corruption caucus uh

    speaking uh uh regarding one comment by uh by the commissioner

    um uh wanted to mention on behalf of the public that

    we we want to make a general objection to the extension of director arnt's contract uh and and we assume that his

    extension will be uh resulting in the perpetuation of the Dominion contract as

    the examiner newspaper highlighted the overly close relationship between the

    vendor dominion and the director's office um which it also involves email

    references to golf outings and alcohol consumption and and just overly friendly

    Behavior I think everybody's probably seen the uh list of examiner articles

    that are complaining and highlighting the the overly close relationship

    between the vendor and the director um again we recognize the director has done

    a decent job of managing the elections but the public perception uh is uh with

    with these articles is is uh darkened to to be kind

    um this uh coupled with the the

    um overt and the behind the scenes the political pressures that are came

    forward from not only the vendor lobbyists but also some supervisors

    specifically supervisor peskin uh when considering uh John's employment

    um is cause for public concern here and I'm trying to couch this in general terms because there seems to be some

    sensitivity to making sure that the languaging is always Pleasant and and

    friendly within this commission but sometimes we we have to be uh Frank and

    and uh forthright and and that is the problem why the public is objected uh to

    the extension of of the contract with the director so we have 30 seconds again

    we're hoping for better days ahead and we appreciate all your efforts thank you

    okay thank you Mr Turner next we have gen t

    you have three minutes when you begin speaking

    I'm gonna try unmuting you again

    oh hi um hi uh this is John C with leaving one

    voters um thank you for the discussion around uh redistricting and the report that came out recently uh I think you know

    for the next uh for the next month um if the commission plan to invite the

    speakers who've written uh the folks who have written the report around um recommendations I also want to make

    sure that the commission also checks check in with the um the folks who wrote the report around you know what's going

    to be any insights around upcoming State bills that they might be considering

    of around uh around reforming local redistricting

    um I think as I mentioned in the past you know a lot of what a lot of uh what came out of the uh Fair Maps act back in

    2019 uh San Francisco some of the some of the great reforms that uh came out of

    there we were exempt because of our Charter and so I think it might be a good discussion uh next month if the

    commission invites the the um the authors about you know what what what uh

    what's going to happen on the state level that might impact of San Francisco in the next 10 years around

    redistricting um thank you okay thank you so no one else has their

    hand reached thank you vice president so that closes agenda item seven let's

    move into agenda item number eight director of evaluate director of Elections 2022 performance evaluation

    discussion and possible action regarding the annual performance evaluation of John Arts the director of Elections so

    we're going to start with um public comment on all member matters pertaining to this agenda item including

    whether to meet in closed session

    okay we have one hand raised so this is Mr Turner

    I've unmuted you thank you Commissioners I'll be very

    brief again on behalf of the public we um don't want to belabor this point but

    we think we've seen enough here uh that it is shameful that we have not put out

    to bid the director's position to have him in this position for so many years

    under the circumstances that has been highlighted by the local press the San

    Francisco Examiner we we consider this shameful because the stakes are so high

    uh San Francisco had the opportunity uh for the last decade plus to move forward

    with the better technology systems and I think it has now been traced directly

    back to Mr Ernst that San Francisco is not a leader in the uh election security

    or election system world uh or in California or nationally like we could

    have been instead it's been left to places like Mississippi and New

    Hampshire to carry the load to Pioneer the work that was really conceptualized

    and advocated in San Francisco originally and now we're seeing these

    other states Take the Lead basically because if anybody has witnessed the

    history we set Los Angeles up with the opportunity they burned through 300

    million dollars they still don't have an open source system that was promised uh

    the funding that was allocated in San Francisco was removed under the veil of

    covid and now we have a non-profit voting Works which is willing to

    basically gift the county with a pilot system and because of Mr Ernst and some

    disinformation imparted to the Secretary of State's office that that is now going

    nowhere as well so all in all because of these actions it's not anything personal

    against Mr Ernst but we just have to call Paul it and and uh tender a general

    objection thank you for your time again okay thank you

    okay there are no more hands raised so we're going to move to a vote on whether to meet in closed session to

    consider item agenda item number eight pursuant to California government code

    54957b and San Francisco Administrative Code 67.10 B so

    um I'm going to start with the vote the vote is on to whether or not to move into closed session to conduct the

    evaluation of director Arts vice president jordanick uh yes close session yes good session

    um commissioner burnhalls yes commissioner die aye commissioner Hayden Crowley

    what of information yeah what what is the alternative aren't we obligated to meet by closed session

    okay yes commissioner labelsey yes commissioner

    Parker yes and I uh president Stone uh vote Yes and

    apologies it just occurred to me I had not been announcing the results of each vote as they happen but um to be clear

    the commission voted unanimously to go into closed session um so we are going to go into closed

    session which has helped pursuant to the brown act section 54957b and Central an ordinance 67.10 B

    to discuss the performance evaluation of director John on Ernst

    uh uh vice president jordanick yeah and I just wanted to um

    when the closed session concludes are we going to be able to is direct current is going to come back for the next videos

    yes director Arts would you be open to coming back can I just send you an email

    when we're done okay great thank you very much and then commissioner Hayden Crowley

    that was my exact question okay well glad we settled that so we are now going

    to move into um closed session I think I'm going to propose that we take a five minute

    um just recess folks can use the restroom we can set up the closed session but we are now we'll be in a

    position okay

    um and just for members of the public we are going to move into a session that will not you won't be able to see us or

    hear us but that means we're just in closed session and we will reconvene in uh at the same Link in um when we are

    done with closed session

    okay okay just opened under the breakfast session come back ready

    okay we're recording now and will you text him yeah actually he's

    probably by the door okay listening that's all we want okay

    um We Are Tonight early for me

    hello session and just bear with me okay

    um so we have to move to discussion and uh and vote pursuant to Sunshine

    ordinance section 67.12 on whether to disclose any portion of the closed session discussion

    regarding public employee performance evaluation um so does anyone want to make a motion

    oh uh

    let's go vice president jordanick if you don't mind Lucy uh commissioner burnhose we'll come right back to you I move that

    we disclosed a new portion of the closed session discussion a second

    so let's we don't need to take public comment on that I don't believe so

    um let's just move it to a vote and the vote is on um the motion was to not

    disclose any portion of the expose session to the public so vice president

    jordanick yes commissioner burnhalls yes commissioner

    die aye commissioner Hayden Crowley yes commissioner levolsi yes commissioner

    Parker yes and I president Stone vote Yes um okay

    thank you all so we are going to move to agenda item number nine reporting a voting system security issues discussion

    and possible action regarding the DVS order private order do you have to

    note that no action was taken

    um thank you commissioner DCA floors do we need to re-voted not to disclose

    anything but for 8f disclosure of action taken that must be disclosed is there anything

    um one second

    um yeah there was no um there was no action taken that could be

    disclosed at this point great so let's remain on um

    nine discussion and possible action regarding the DVS order right privacy flaw affecting San Francisco's Dominion

    voting system and reporting a potential similar voting system security issues to the Department of Elections um and I

    will hand it over to vice president jordanick to introduce our guest speaker

    okay I um I I haven't

    I'm not sure that he's um awake actually um 10 minutes ago he was awake but

    I um I'm just not 100 sure oh looks like looks like he's awake Wonder

    okay great so um I'm going to um

    promote him to a panelist and then I'll just say a few opening comments

    instrument welcome and thank you for staying up

    um yeah I assume I've lost my agenda here okay great

    yeah so um so today we have a guest speaker

    um Dr Alex Holderman he's a professor of computer science and engineering at the

    University of Michigan and director of Michigan's Center for computer security and Society

    and Dr Holderman wrote us an email in early January that we briefly touched on

    at the last meeting so um I just want to say a couple quick comments about what I was envisioning

    for this agenda item and then turn it over to Dr Halterman for um about five minutes or so for him to

    just you know say some things but basically for this item I thought we could focus on number one just

    understanding what the DVS order um privacy flaw is and then secondly I

    thought we could kind of talk about what we might be able to do going forward to

    ensure that the um the director and the department have a chance to hear about issues like these

    sooner I know Dr halderman tried to reach out to the Secretary of State and um or you

    did reach out to the Secretary of State and the the federal agencies well in advance of the election but um that word

    didn't necessarily trickle down to the department so um Dr Halterman I wanted to uh turn it

    over to you and I also like to this thank you very much for um being so generous with your time and I know

    you're three hours ahead so it's very late for you right now and I know you have a really busy schedule

    well um commissioner jordanick and members of the commission thank you so

    much for the opportunity to address you tonight um it it is rather late for me but I'll

    do my best if I may um could I could I show just a few slides to perhaps give an overview

    of the um the technical situation of course

    all right thank you do you have privileges or do I need to do something let me see can you see yes yes excellent

    all right so just a few words about who I am and where I'm coming from

    um I'm a computer scientist a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Michigan uh my work is

    about cyber security and much of it touches on uh elections I try to use

    science and technology to make elections more trustworthy um I've also worked considerably in

    elections in public policy including testifying twice to the U.S Congress about threats facing our elections

    um I uh in addition have had the privilege of working frequently with election officials I co-chaired the

    state of Michigan's election security advisory commission and um uh about a

    decade and a half ago now I participated in the California Secretary of State's top to bottom review of election

    technology I'm here to talk about uh a problem that

    uh my team discovered that we call DVS order and what it is is it's a privacy

    flaw that affects data produced by certain Dominion ballot scanners including the Dominion ice ballot

    scanner that's used in San Francisco for about eight percent of votes it's used I understand for in-person voting

    the flaw and I underscore cannot be used to alter election results however it

    does under some scenarios threaten voter privacy and I think it's important to

    seriously address so here's the problem

    um Dominion scanners uh in order essentially to try to protect privacy

    assign each ballot that they scan um a random looking ID number this ID

    number is carried through even after the ballot data is otherwise shuffled and rearranged again to protect privacy but

    it appears alongside the content of the ballot when data like ballot images or

    cast vote records is produced and published and this is all data that San

    Francisco makes public what my team discovered is that these

    random IDs are actually completely predictable unfortunately and for the um for the

    nerds in the audience what's happening is uh the scanners use what's called a linear congruential generator and this

    is something that we've known since the 1970s it's completely unsuitable for security applications

    but the upshot is that using only public information well anyone can deduce the

    algorithm that's used to assign these ID numbers and fully unshuffle all of the voted ballots

    now the Privacy risk that this implies is that using Data San Francisco makes

    public anyone can unshuffle all of the ballots cast on ice and learn both the

    order in which they were cast and by associating them with other data the time that each ballot was cast

    now most voters probably aren't going to have their you know their names published with their ballots tomorrow as

    a result of this but it does pose a threat in several quite potential scenarios

    for instance poll workers election observers or were other voters in a

    polling place could note the time a victim scans their ballot and then later go and find their ballot online for

    instance if I go to vote with my wife she or I could figure out how the other

    voted also some voters quite inadvertently publish information online that would be

    sufficient to reveal how they voted even long into the future for instance it's

    become quite popular to tweet out your voter number when going to the polls along with where you voted this could be

    enough to identify your ballot so the steps to protect against this are

    actually pretty simple um the most immediate mitigation is to remove or replace the ballot IDs before

    publishing ballot by ballot data and that's enough to stop members of the

    public from exploiting the problem Dominion has um

    produce the software update that is now undergoing uh Certification testing at

    the federal level and in California however I have no way to test whether

    that patch correctly fixes the problem um so uh uh I'll have to stop there in

    terms of how much I endorse it now I'd like to given the focus of the

    discussion I'd like to just quickly go over the steps that I and my team took

    to try to inform people about this problem we discovered it last summer and uh

    quickly realized that there were hundreds of jurisdictions potentially affected over 21 states and as well as

    parts of Canada Puerto Rico and others so um in August we informed Dominion

    directly as well as the federal EAC incisa

    um in October after giving the agencies and Dominion time to assess the problem

    we wrote to state election officials directly in each of the affected States including California chief of Elections

    janeline and you have my letter to her then finally on October 14th we made our

    findings public knowing that jurisdictions might have to change the data they publish in order to protect

    against this so we wanted some explanation for the public to be available

    we also published open source software to help jurisdictions test for and correct the flaw

    now given those steps I was quite surprised uh in early November when I I

    went to the San Francisco elections website and noticed that data that was being published from the November

    election was still vulnerable to the flaw so immediately I wrote to and and

    sent a Twitter DM uh to the Department of Elections explaining the problem

    um attaching the same disclosure I had sent to the state and urging some

    um some quick steps to fix it but I didn't get any response and uh that's

    why in early January I I wrote to this Commission the takeaways that I'd like to leave you

    with are first to just um thank San Francisco for being really truly a national leader in election data

    transparency uh the kind of data you publish including ballot by ballot data

    it goes a long way to both supporting accuracy and upholding voter confidence

    and this data can continue to be published safely but I think this flaw

    is an illustration of why Extra Care is sometimes going to be necessary to safeguard privacy

    now it's also a reminder that timely information about vulnerabilities is

    crucial for security but it seems to me that something broke down uh in the

    process that caused San Francisco unfortunately and unnecessarily to

    publish potentially vulnerable data from the November election even after the flaw was was known to the manufacturer

    at the federal agencies and and on and the state next time that researchers like me

    discover flaws affecting um election systems uh I'd like to know

    how we can make sure that San Francisco and jurisdictions like it get the information they need in order to

    respond promptly so thank you very very much I I'd be happy to answer any

    questions okay thank you very much Dr Halterman

    um so Commissioners would anyone like to ask him a question for questions

    commissioner burn holes uh thank you and thank you very much professor halderman

    uh am I correct then in understanding that simply by not publishing those numbers

    this problem is mitigated it's greatly mitigated

    um there's still a threat that the data could leak in the future there's a threat that

    um someone uh on the inside who has access to the data could exploit it but

    that significantly reduces the risk because the public then cannot anyone in

    the public can't exploit the data directly right it would take a malicious actor inside of some okay and then yes

    in terms of the Dominion update I presume you can't

    tested now because it's not yet been set out into the for use or will you be

    able to test it once it's in place Grandma um there'll be some things will will

    certainly be able to to try after the um new update is in use uh but Dominion

    hasn't shared information with us about their strategy and trying to address this and uh certainly hasn't given us

    any opportunity to test the the new data I'm somewhat concerned because

    um the same certification processes of course that are examining the update or the ones that examine the original

    software and didn't notice this um flawed that in in our views probably

    should have been obvious if they uh were giving due consideration to privacy so

    they're they're also implications for the scope of testing in the future got it okay thank you and then he's uh

    this may be a question um for director Arns but I'll ask you as well is the reason

    that the numbers were published in the first place to help individual voters

    see their own individual ballot is that the proposed purpose of publishing those

    numbers so so no um it's the purpose of them is just to

    have a way of um following the same ballot across different parts of the election system

    essentially um but the voter is even isn't supposed to be able to identify their own balance

    part of the the security that the system is designed to ensure is that the ballot

    order and identification isn't known to anyone so by removing the numbers that sounds

    like there's no uh loss to the individual voter or to

    the voting populace well um what we suggest instead of just

    removing them outright is essentially replacing them consistently with different actually random numbers so

    um you it would be helpful for instance to be a you San Francisco releases data

    in multiple formats and in multiple iterations as new votes come in there

    are updates to the data sets for instance so it would be very helpful to be able to know that a ballot in release

    one of the data set is the same ballot as the equivalent record in release two

    Etc the open source software that we provided is designed to replace the IDS

    while ensuring that consistency so there's no so that's what your patch does is actually provides different

    numbers a different that's that's right and to be clear it's not a patch it

    doesn't change the voting machines itself but it's a tool for processing the data before you upload it to the

    website essentially to replace the vulnerable IDs with new securely

    randomized ones thank you for clarifying that so it's in a it's a brief additional step provided by this open

    source tool that you've provided on the website that's right and last question

    and again thank you for your time um other jurisdictions have they

    responded um we've gotten responses from some other jurisdictions

    um frankly less communication than we would have expected given the number of people who are at stake however I will

    note that um the number of large jurisdictions that publish detailed data

    is unfortunately remains fairly low and where data is being published it's often at through a foia process rather than

    through um a well thought out uh official

    publication process like San Francisco uses that makes good sense thank you very

    much thank you very much okay thank you commissioner bernholds

    uh anyone else commissioner died um thank you very much Professor

    hollerman what response did you get from the state of California then

    we also didn't get a response from the state of California so as far as you know uh

    the certification process has not been modified um I I don't know anything about any

    changes to the certification process no I'm sorry okay thank you but we we

    haven't gotten further communication after our disclosure to the state

    okay thank you so I'm Dr Halterman I have a few questions um the first one was something that you

    touched on is related to the certification process you know there's the federal process as well as California has its own process so I just

    wanted to ask you like is it your understanding that it is the certification processes intent to catch

    issues like these or is it sort of out of scope for the process um well it's a good question the federal

    certification process um it's not clearer whether uh the

    privacy issues like these are are in scope um the new vvsg does include

    um a stronger notion of privacy in uh the standard but it's not reflected in

    the um uh the test instances that they are using presently and in any case this

    software is certified under the old vvsg 1.0 um California's process I'm a little bit

    less familiar with uh the details of the current process but I believe it to be

    relatively um more intensive than the federal process at least more transparent

    and do they check the source code this part of that process do you know um I believe there is source code review

    as part of it but a problem like this um uh uh so if the

    um if in the certification of the change the testers are asking carefully whether

    this problem is solved um I believe they'll do a good job if they're asking merely whether other

    problems that might affect certification are introduced well um that that I I'd urge them to think

    carefully about whether the the Patch address is the problem because there are some subtleties

    okay and then my next question is a little bit related and it's about open source voting systems and San

    Francisco's been interested in open source voting since around 2008 and I just wanted you to comment on like how

    would things have been different if this had been open source system like would it be easier to find issues like these

    or would it um you know just you can comment on that oh I'm sure the problem would have been found long ago if this

    this system was open source um so um researchers first pointed out that a

    problem with ballot ID randomization um threaten voter privacy in another

    voting system almost 20 years ago in one of the the first Syria's academic

    security studies about U.S election system and uh it's just completely remarkable

    to me that this is still a problem in machines that are being sold new today so

    um I think there's been uh an under appreciation of privacy issues by

    um uh by vendors and Regulators in this space um and uh making making code open would

    uh expose so many more eyes to right how are these how are these numbers being

    generated and are they are they actually leaking information okay thank you and then uh one more

    question um so one of the things I wanted to focus on is what we can do as a commission to kind of make things better

    in the future you know for example I could see us writing a letter to the Secretary of State asking them to be

    better about communicating these issues to the to the local jurisdiction when they hear about it but I also wanted to

    ask you like is there anything that a local elections Department like San Francisco could do to make it easier for

    security researchers like you and your team to notify departments when you find out about things like this

    well given San Francisco's scale and sophistication um uh perhaps you have the resources to

    um have a an email address that's for security reports that's publicly available and monitored

    um uh I don't know what happened internally to my communications whether they just didn't reach the right person

    or whether there was such a cue that they didn't get um read in time

    but having some channel that is publicly available many organizations and an

    increasing number of uh of States have

    um dedicated security email addresses for reports like this

    and uh Perhaps Perhaps the um perhaps San Francisco elections is

    that it's also possible that I miss some obvious channels myself in which case if

    you have good channels already making them easier to find through your public websites and through internet searches

    could be a boon but also figuring out with the state

    what's happening and perhaps asking the EAC and sizza um

    for for help getting information like that to you as well there's there's so many jurisdictions that for researchers

    coming from the outside like me we couldn't possibly go down the whole list and even determine exactly who the

    relevant contacts were but um the states and the federal agencies I I believe it

    should be part of their job to maintain that information and provide information sharing so I I really want to know what

    happened in this instance and how we can all be doing a better job to help jurisdictions like you and your voters

    next time okay and then just on the security email address is there a standard way to

    publicize those um uh there is a standard there's a I think now a security.text standard that

    might be um pertinent to this that works a little bit like robots.txt but also

    just having it on the contact page could be could be helpful okay and then lastly when is your paper

    coming out do you have a paper we do have we have a paper that's uh working its way through the publication pipeline

    now uh perhaps uh by this summer we'll have a more detailed paper but I'd love

    to if there are if there's further information available about um uh both the disclosure process in San

    Francisco and um uh about your future plans for all of

    this I'd love to be able to include them in some of our writing and review of this incident

    which again it's not a problem that affects San Francisco predominantly not

    San Francisco more than these other jurisdictions but your position as um such a leader in data publication I

    think could serve as a positive model given uh effective remediation

    one one other thing I would add to your previous question though and I know we're late is that the vendors have a

    very important role to play in this and um I I would be extremely surprised if

    um in fact Dominion didn't let San Francisco know uh that this problem had been found and reported to them and I I

    I I I would be surprised if they would don't have some contractual obligation

    to share that information to you when it's relevant and actionable um but uh uh but that's that that would

    be something I would be asking in your position okay sounds good so um yeah thank you

    very much again for all the work that you and your team have done and also for reaching out to us and and for being

    um here this evening to present to us um Commissioners does anyone else have any questions you'd like to ask

    okay I don't see any no thank you all right thank you all so very much for

    the opportunity sleep well thank you thank you very much thanks

    yeah um yeah we can open it up for discussion as president jordanick where you gonna make

    a comment well I thought we couldn't maybe um yeah I was just gonna see if we could discuss maybe talk about direct

    currents as well but yeah take the reins okay um yeah so

    um yeah direct currents I just had a couple questions um like number one did did um

    did you or your department know about this issue before election day or did you hear about it from anyone or

    not no uh the median data issue notice in September that there are these phrase

    that they're questions about posting the cast vote record in relation to posting in conjunction to posting videos when

    people voted which didn't really apply to us we don't post videos

    they issued a second notice indicating that someone who I guess was Professor holder been uh had had reviewed a

    previous version of the of the software and indicated that the order of ballots

    could be uh discerned and then to check the local law regarding posting of

    Casper records so again it wasn't something that was directly on point to San Francisco

    yeah I mean I I did see those documents and I I agree with you that they were kind of vague in in what they were

    really saying but um I was wondering do you think you could share those with the commission or okay

    and um I guess

    yeah I guess that's those are the only questions I had

    I have a question come here commissioner die thank you um I was wondering so I get your point

    that it's probably pretty unlikely that someone I mean the

    the examples that he cited where you would you would literally have to be watching and noting you know the time

    and the precinct that someone voted and um I guess my question is even though it's

    unlikely given that Professor Haldeman has provided a software to you know to fix

    this and strip those numbers and replace them how much effort would it be to

    to run those uh run the the data through and and clean it up and

    repost I don't know but we're not going to change the results that have been posted because the castle record is part

    of the official certification of the election in San Francisco okay and we hash all the information and so we can't

    even break that hash to post new records uh and also I mean that that time has

    passed as far as the November election is concerned so no I don't I I don't I'm

    sure the tool is easy to use the way it's described but we're not going to go back and change the records from that

    election okay

    and then um one more follow-up question do you

    like do you do you know what the appropriate context point for something like that is it best to use the general

    inbox or do you know um you're also reaching out to you I

    mean contact me uh one uh I mean but also Professor Holden I think he didn't

    interact with the with the Commission in September 2021 so I I believe he had the commissions he

    spoke at the commission meetings previously so I would think that he would have the commission's address but

    he can he can also uh just contact me uh I did check my emails I didn't have

    anything forward to me from the general email box uh about this so I and dming

    on Twitter normally isn't how we would pick up information about the voting system so uh

    but you know they can call to um there's you know different ways

    okay all right great thank you

    any other comments Commissioners yes commissioner burn holes

    director orange it seems to me that the other two suggestions that Professor halderman made about a security at SF

    elections email would be an easy thing to add and or adding it into the

    metadata of the website like robot.text if there's a security.text if I

    understood that correctly those seem like easy fixes yeah because

    he's oh go ahead I'm sorry but just because Professor halderman is only one of many security researchers

    who might find something certainly we can put an email address on our website

    and then um so in terms of the 2024 election I guess

    there are two questions one is Will dominions update

    solve this problem which we should have plenty of time to figure out

    before 2024 but if it doesn't might the department

    insert this extra step that Professor halderman described the tool that he's

    created requiring which is prior to posting cast

    vote records would you possibly possibly I think we have to wait to with

    Dominion does and how it's reviewed by the state because if the department does anything to the data it's not the

    official information from the voting system so everything that we post is directly generated from the voting system we

    don't take any intervention with that information

    okay that makes sense I just okay I have to think about that for thank you

    thanks director yo um does anyone else want to make a comment

    who hasn't spoken okay commissioner die um it seems to me that I do think

    writing a letter to the Secretary of State's office about this issue and

    whether trying to understand whether the these checks on privacy are part of their

    certification process because if it is out of scope then the next certification isn't going to catch it either

    so I think raising it as an issue you know I think it would be good for

    the commission and director arens to write a letter about that because we rely on the certification from the state

    to tell us the systems are good and not only that we are forced to certify the

    election and if doing so compromises voter privacy I think that's

    a problem even though it might be very obscure in

    this particular case the next error may not be what kind of information just

    um so I remember uh the professor said that they did reach out to the secretaries of

    State the Secretary of State's office correct correct and got no response from California yeah just wanted to clarify

    so what I'm suggesting is we put a little juice on it being a large

    jurisdiction in California expressing our concern about it and it's

    great that Dominion has a fix but again it was a certified system so

    you know if if privacy checks are not part of their certification processes

    and this is an algorithm that has been known to be flawed since the 1970s I'm

    really concerned vice president yes so um just real

    quickly um so Dr Halterman wasn't he never presented to the commission before just just on that on that point but um in

    terms of a letter I think it's you know I think it's a good idea for us to do something like that I think the letter

    could maybe touch on number one make sure that the communication channels are better going

    forward you know for notifying the department number two it could also ask about

    assurance that this has been fixed assurance that this particular error has been fixed but also that their

    certification and scope point of views checks on private point of order let's let vice president jordanick finish and

    then we'll come back to you commissioner day yeah so so I guess I wanted to ask if the if the commission feels a letter

    would be appropriate like what do people think would be the best process for that um you know ranging from delegating

    you know giving president Stone The Authority versus drafting something and having us look at it at the next meeting

    I don't know what commissioner die I'd actually suggest that that director aren't to write the letter

    I mean yeah you know I mean does the

    Secretary of State supposed to be serving San Francisco right and should be notifying us of flaws like this and

    their certification processes should be good enough to catch them presumably so

    this is President Stone um I would support a letter from the commission I don't think that we should

    compel the director to draft a letter um but I do think that we can draft one

    and I would be open if um perhaps vice president jordanick since this was an agenda item that you

    know you wanted to make sure resurfaced perhaps I could propose that you work and you could work in collaboration with

    another commissioner but maybe you dropped it for us to review the next meeting

    yeah that'd be great thank you I like that thank you would others like to comment on that as well

    I just suggest you get some input from John on that

    okay let's um let's take public comment

    okay I'm just pulling up the this church oh it's off my screen

    um okay we have it looks like they're our forehands

    so uh just go in order here Mr Turner I'm unmuting you

    you have yes um we're glad that Professor halderman raised the issue and uh commissioner

    jordanick followed up here um this brings the Privacy issue forward

    um but also the certification issue uh per Roy saltman who is known as the father of the certification process the

    certification process in the United States including the California process is a broken process due to the

    proprietary software um issue so this is why we uh advocate

    for open source systems we can complain about this and catch have little gotcha

    moments but we're never going to solve anything until we get rid of these proprietary systems which is what the

    federal and state legislation coming forward proposes to do um

    it's the uh communic as the as the former communications director for open

    voting Consortium we're proud to be the Catalyst for not only the the local voting system task force in San

    Francisco but also the California 2007 top to bottom review so I speak with some Authority when we said we

    appreciate Dr halderman's finding uh regarding unshuffling uh in commensurate

    privacy issues but want to highlight this is just one of many vulnerabilities attached to the Dominion system as well

    as any system that will be running proprietary code so I'm glad that you're

    finally coming around into the light on this issue I know there's a propensity to protect John Ernst here because he's

    a very affable fellow very congenial but the fact is we're we're out of our

    league here having these conversations two people that do understand this is uh

    I know uh because I've had intense conversations with folks that actually know what they're talking about than in

    involved Chris jordanick so we applaud Mr jordanick here and Professor halderman but we have to all stipulate

    that very few of us have the technical technology chops to engage in this conversation so we have to defer when we

    hear issues like this and let me just guarantee you that the certification process in the United States is broken

    and cannot be repaired until we move forward with open source systems uh

    Dominion systems for these reasons and issues concerning voter perception and

    confidence must be replaced in the public implores you again this commission has the power to do things

    for the benefit of not only the state but for the United States and now we're going into 2024. we all pretend riots in

    2016 that could have been avoided but now we're doing this circular talk and

    we just hope that you cease and desist ignoring the public pleas to move forward with the open source systems

    thank you okay thank you so next we have a member

    of the public I'm unmuting you you have three minutes

    when you begin speaking Francisco and I just wanted to talk a

    little bit about what was just said from the previous comment and as well as the

    agenda topic so real quick in order to figure out the num the number connection

    to the voter it seems like someone has to be watching who's entering the ballot

    card individually for the whole day or for a time period starting from the

    beginning this is really confusing to me because one this would be possible this would be

    really hard um at the same time voters do not insert one card they insert multiple cards so

    the vote cast record would not connect directly voters do not insert all five

    cards this will also in create an issue voters do not issue all

    five cards at the same time as a poll worker voters have issues they go back and get a replacement

    I'm sure other members of the commission have served as poll workers and can attest to

    the fact that there is no order of cards going into the machine so in order to connect this data that's

    being published to me is a moot point if we have examples of how this has been

    interpreted if any of the Commissioners have voted and if we could even figure

    out what number they're connected to on the vote cast record that would be super interesting to me

    um regarding the comments by the previous commenter on open source um of course we're all open for it I

    think you know San franciscans will always love the best stuff but specifically to the examples mentioned

    Mississippi just recently introduced a grant to replace their punch card

    ballots and with that they are upgrading their system and voting works is just among

    six other vendors that are certified by the state so once again the state is not

    using it they are a certified vendor and some counties small counties may be

    using them similar to New Hampshire only three small counties piloted the program

    this last election um just like the Secretary of State there

    mentioned easy to find they only wanted to test the small counties just to

    figure out if it would work and the other thing I just want to reiterate 30 seconds

    all these places do not have the requirements of San Francisco voters when I say that we have

    a complicated election here we have ranked Choice voting we offer so many accessible resources we offer the ballot

    in so many languages I guarantee you Mississippi and New Hampshire

    in the small rural counties do not do anywhere close to that and for

    us to be looking at them as Role Models is a really bad it's your time is up

    okay next we have Jim s you have three minutes

    hello we can hear you okay

    um I wanted to ask Dr Holliman another question uh and I'm asking this important because

    several commissions are new to the commission and would not have heard of this

    but he was involved in checking out a possible flaw and

    Dominion as used as in Georgia and the flaws I recalled was with the QR codes

    but everything was put into court secrecy and I have not heard anything

    about what came of all that and I was going to ask him what happened

    but obviously uh he's sensibly going to bed um

    but I think we should not just let this go because that one sounded like a

    serious bug that could affect elections so I

    don't know maybe we'll bring this up another time but I just wanted to not let the the point go to

    uh go by without somebody raising it in it thank you

    okay thank you so we have one more commenter

    uh George on meeting you you have three minutes

    under the impression that ninety percent of San Francisco voters are vote by mail

    so I I don't really understand how their privacy would be affected by this

    um Mr halderman also made the point that uh sometimes the public releases their

    their ballot IDs or they show it um and that's connected to the uh you know

    the cast mode records so you know that's their choice if they want to go public and maybe a solution with that is just

    to let them know that if you know there's something in the motor handbook that if you do that you know you can

    people can figure out how you vote um being able to check the cast About

    Records people to independently audit is something that's increasing and you know

    these these numbers are these IDs on the ballots are a means for people to kind of verify that uh things are correct and

    it's it's I mean I wrote down the numbers on my ballot so I could check the cast vote records and and see that

    my votes were tabulated correctly and I think more and more people in this day and age want may want to be able to do

    that so I would just say that you know um before you make a decision I hope you

    will put this out to the next month I'm meeting with an election expert this Sunday he's a he's a national

    expert on on Election integrity and um I want to bring this up to him and

    see if he may have a an alternate you know

    argument against this and maybe an alternate solution to protect privacy at

    the same time as being able to allow you know for the transparent transparency at

    the level we'd like so I can get back to you guys within a week and let you know whether probably

    sooner than that if this person would either want to make a counter argument with alternate suggestions or have

    somebody else do that or your next meeting I just wanted to make that available to you because it's really

    important to hear if there are two sides to this it's important to hear both sides before making decision thank you

    very much okay thank you

    so that a little more hands are raised great

    thank you that closes agenda number nine and we'll move to agenda number 10 discussion and

    possible action on commission policies regarding remote public comment and parental leave discussion possible

    action and considerations elevated in the city attorney's January now that should be January 10th I believe

    apologies for there January 10th memorandum in public opinion regarding the continuation of remote public

    participation in addition to parental leave policies so I'm going to run through this pretty quickly

    um all right there are two topics that uh and policies I want to elevate and

    I'm just going to kind of run through it so on January 10th the city attorney's office issued a memo regarding the

    conclusion of the state of emergency which ends later this month and they outlined rules and implications about

    commissioner attendance and also some insight into remote public comment and

    basically what this entails is that the the presence requirement that was lifted

    during the state of emergency and special rules that pertain to covid

    will be the the president's requirement will be reinstated and

    um there's more information on the memos in the memo specifically but the big

    thing to note is that the president's requirement generally bars members of the policy bodies from attending

    meetings remotely with a couple of exceptions but specifically I want to focus on

    um uh something that is on page three of the memo and also Pages 12 and 13 you do

    not need to look at those specifically right now I'll read you at the important line um specifically it says there is neither

    a requirement for Nora prohibition on allowing members of the public to attend meetings of a policy body remotely

    except to the extent that the law requires the first two caveats basically

    each policy body May adopt its own policy after considering the logistical and Staffing implications and Consulting

    with the city attorney's office on any concerns so there are some requirements should we have a member of our

    commission with an accommodation um specifically as outlined in

    components of the Americans with Disabilities Act One important thing to note is that the

    Board of Supervisors could adopt an ordinance setting a city-wide policy regarding remote attendance by members

    of the public but in absence of an ordinance each policy body May adopt its own policy and I'd quote that directly

    from the memo so I would like to propose that the elections commission make it formal policy less or until laws or

    Citywide policies change to offer remote public comment during all regular and special meetings independent of any

    potential commission or accommodation that would also support

    that that need so basically what I'm saying is regardless of any commissioner

    needs that would go into that I think it should be elections commission policy that we support remote public comment

    there are many benefits from an equity perspective as to why this policy is Meaningful and imperative but

    importantly advocacy groups have been expressing support for this policy with the Board of Supervisors and other commissions

    and in fact there have been a couple of reports that among the 100 plus

    commissions that are meeting this week many are talking about this issue and that the Board of Supervisors has been

    kind of waiting to see what commissions do though there may be some policies that come forward so the last piece of

    this that I really wanted to talk about this I really wanted to say um is in addition to kind of supporting

    folks with disabilities but also other folks who have schedules that make it difficult for them to show up in person

    unable to make it to City Hall for many reasons access to Transportation conflicts with scheduling people working

    multiple jobs parents Etc I think this body was created by the public to offer

    transparency and access and I think Public Access is integral to our mandate

    and I really think it's not in coming on us to ensure that we are as accessible as legally possible

    um so I move that we amend our bylaws to include to include this I don't know

    where my motion is um let me find it my motion long long oh

    yes I motion that we amend our bylaws to authorize this as a commission unless or until law or policies change that we

    adopt a formal policy that we will offer remote public comment during all regular and special meetings independent of any

    commission or accommodation per your bylaws there's a process for

    amendments yeah two-thirds vote um the commission may amend these bylaws

    but majority board the full commission after circulating the proposed amendments at least 10 days prior to the meeting where a motion to amend is to be

    made I wish that the deputy City attorney had mentioned that to me when I shared it

    but I hear you I don't need to move that we adopt uh

    change in bylaws but I can move that we as a body can adopt this policy and in

    the next meeting in March when hopefully we can vote to support this policy I

    will have presented a bylaw Amendment how does that sound

    yes I I mean I don't know if um if this is a policy I don't necessarily think

    that you need to amend your bylaws it could just be a policy adopted by the commission um if that if the bylaw route is what

    you were intending to do is you know that's a different process yeah I will I will make sure to agendaize that in the

    next meeting but as it stands now I would like to move that we don't amend our bylaws in this meeting but perhaps

    authorize as a policy that we support remote public comment for public access

    to our meetings uh via WebEx or whatever platform the city requires second

    thank you um let's move or is there any discussion on

    the motion yes please yeah I I very much support your motion I think it's we

    should be um providing more opportunities for the public to comment I I did want to maybe propose a an

    amendment or maybe just see what people think I I was reading that the Board of Supervisors they are

    considering remote public comment in general and it's not clear to me where they're going to land on it but for my

    reading of the memo it's also possible that they could adopt something that would actually

    prevent us from allowing members of the public to comment remotely so I'm wondering if as part of the motion we

    could also like Express to the board that we would like for them to preserve

    the option that we'd be allowed to have remote public come in if that makes sense that could be done maybe through a

    letter or something I support that I definitely am open to how we do that one

    area we could consider is reaching out to other officers of other

    commissions and perhaps making it not just an elections commission letter of support but finding other commissions

    that are also adopting this policy and having it be a coalition of commissions

    per se and I would be happy to take on that since obviously I feel very

    strongly about this I would be happy to look into that specifically so could I

    maybe phrase it as we we authorize the president to work with other Commissioners to like Express this in

    the way that's most appropriate okay something like that I'd be happy to do that great

    anyone else have comments just kind of order do we need to is that

    official Amendment do we need to vote on an amendment before are you moving it as a an amendment I'm

    not the expert in Robert's Rules so you tell me what I need to do you get to decide I mean I think that

    that doesn't necessarily need to be an amendment to the motion if I just agree to do it I think the motion is that it

    would be my motion was that it is our policy as a commission and then I think separately to support the execution or

    implementation of that I can you know I think it's you don't need I don't need to be bound by emotion I will do that

    okay well I think just to be safe you know you'll have the commissions backing but maybe maybe it would be a friendly

    Amendment just to authorize to work with the with someone like the second be Amendment well it's a friendly Amendment

    you'll you just have to accept it okay what yes I I will what is the specific

    amendment to it that we um we authorize U.S president to um

    you know work with other commissions to um Express in whatever way

    um you feel would be appropriate to the board our desire to be able to allow

    continued remote public comments cool so you have a lot of flexibility

    basically thank you I will do my best to translate that effectively in our minutes

    um that that makes sense to me um does anyone have any other comments I

    think uh well I'll just continue really quickly I just um I also strongly

    support this um we've seen you know you all know that I'm coming from the education world and we've seen so much

    more increased participation and accessibility for families especially as the school board has allowed public

    comment and has found a great blend of having both in person and public um during this time and including for

    volunteer things like PTA meetings and you know I'm on another oversight committee and when we allow that I just

    think it's best for us to do that you know if we really want to encourage participation if we want to encourage

    um the system to really work and represent that we should make efforts like this so I strongly support it

    thank you commissioner Parker and thank you vice president jordanick does anyone else have comments

    um there is one additional before we take a vote I wanted to add and I and DCA floor has stopped me if I can't

    there was an additional uh do we need to take if I want to move to make another

    if I want to make another motion that is tangential to this

    do we have to take public comment now or can I make that separate take that separate action before we take public

    accountant I think you can um I'm not an expert on Robert's Rules but no I just meant like legally like in terms of the

    rules I think you could put both motions forward um and then take public comment and then

    vote on both motions but I think the parental leave policy

    um if your intention was also to amend the bylaws then we would have to I know I I was gonna say I will not have the

    motion be amending the bylaws until next month however I would like to move

    um to include this and I'll give a little bit of context so thank you um so also included in the January 10th

    memo was Administrative Code section 67v1h which provides that each policy

    body shall amend its Rules of Order other similar document to include the parental leave policy and shall provide

    a copy to all staff and policy members so yes I had anticipated um presenting

    an amendment to the bylaws however I will postpone that until next meeting but I I move that we support this

    recommendation I don't really think we need to vote on it per se knowing that

    um we have to do it the next month but I do recommend folks to

    um to read it uh recheck read what was included in the memo because we are not

    in compliance with that recommendation that they had already provided so I guess I take my motion back but I wanted

    to open that conversation in case anyone has any questions or feedback

    okay so let's move to um public comment and then we'll take a vote

    okay it looks like we have just one hand raised or two hands raised

    so take public comment from uh George

    you have three minutes you're unmuted well I won't need it but um first off uh

    I just really want to say I'm really happy that you are making this motion

    it's going to be very good for San Francisco you know a lot of people suffered and a number of small

    businesses went out of business permanently from Co from the lockdowns and it was such a terrible situation

    with Kobe but one of the bright things that came out of it was this public remote participation

    so you know it's one of the things we can make the most of uh getting some benefit out of the whole covet situation

    so uh that on top of um um

    well I mean the other other thing I want to say about this is um I'd like you to take a moment to think back on some of

    the occasions where public comment has improved your ability remote public

    comment has improved your ability to make better decisions on this Commission

    and so when you thought of those things maybe include a few of those examples when you write the letters that go to

    the Board of Supervisors and not only does this benefit uh the situation with

    them being in supportive of you keeping public uh participation open on this

    commission but it will also build the momentum for them to keep public

    participation that's Remote open on other hearings and other Commissions in

    San Francisco thank you that's all I wanted to say okay thank you

    next we have Mr Turner uh you're unmuted you have three minutes

    yes thank you on behalf of the public I want to give our support to the

    Commissioners for moving forward uh on this uh thank you for that and uh

    associate myself with the comments of the previous caller Sunset George I

    think is the name he goes by um and if uh possible the public would like to find out the the mystery person

    that he's meeting with that is the nationally renowned expert thank you

    okay thank you next we have um Jim Soper I believe

    you have three minutes I'm unmeting you

    okay just a quick comment on what's happened with public well with

    participation since covet I was on the voting Services converting systems task

    force about 2009. and back then the brown actors were such

    that we could not meet except in person nobody were allowed

    and this wound up meaning that an expert in disability in voting more women

    couldn't join the task force because he's blind and he can't drive to

    San Francisco and I was making some plans to get the brown actually written and it seems that

    covet took care of that but I hope that this commission and

    other people involved keep it that way because one of the things you're keeping

    the disabled making it difficult for the disabled to participate if they have to show up in person

    and so just keep that in mind I think it's an important channel uh for both

    potentially new members of the commission and for the public thank you very much

    okay thank you I believe there are no more hands raised

    thank you I moved to a vote um I just wanted to actually clarify it actually

    is not DCA floors's fault it's definitely mine um so I apologize for that rude comment I definitely could

    have done my due diligence and I will ahead of the next meeting um okay let's move to a vote on

    the motion and amended motion um to make it a elections commission

    policy across our regular meetings and special meetings committee meetings to offer remote public comment and that I

    will work with or other commissions to express support and advocate for the

    policy to the Board of Supervisors vice president jordanick yes commissioner

    burn holes yes commissioner die aye commissioner Hayden Crowley yes

    commissioner levoci yes commissioner Parker yes and I uh president Stone

    definitely say yes um and with that we have unanimous support

    um for the for that motion and quickly let's just run through agenda item uh number 11. does anyone have

    specific items that they want to ask for for the agenda for future meetings

    we're just teaching initiative yes uh just have a chance to review a letter

    to the Secretary of State regarding the um security issues

    okay okay it looks like there are no other

    um suggestions so with that I will close

    um agenda item 11 and I think we have to oh possible action do

    we have to take public comment on the agenda items oh no yes okay so okay my

    my mistake sorry let's move to public comment for agenda item 11 agenda items for future meetings

    okay we have uh one hand raised Mr Turner you have three minutes

    thank you Commissioners I'll be very brief considering the late hour the public appreciates the letter going from

    the commission to the Secretary of State if I can be of assistance with that I have good uh working rapport with the

    Secretary of State's office and have uh not encountered issues getting responses

    um also it would be great if we could agendize open source voting uh rather

    than Dart in and out around the elephant in the room with different agenda items it would be great to just tackle it head

    on and and let's do our duty here not only to the county the state but the

    United States thank you for your time okay thank you and we have another commenter

    listed as member of the public you have three minutes

    hello uh it seems like the commission has achieved a lot in the past few

    meetings so I think I highly suggest the commission go back to its goal for

    racial equity and make some progress on that

    that's it okay thank you

    it looks like there are no further hands raised great so with

    that I quote I'm closing agenda item 11 and it is now 10 41 pm and I am

    adjourning this meeting thank you all night

    English (auto-generated)



    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.


    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 March 15, 2023