The City's minutes for this meeting are not on file in this archive. This briefing states only what the City's agenda lists. Nothing here is taken from the machine transcription.
No agenda from the City is on file for this meeting.
The recording's machine transcription is below. It is unverified: words and names may be misheard, and it cannot establish who acted or how anyone voted.
Transcript Partial transcript
Machine transcription of the meeting recording. The words are the recognizer's, except where a passage is marked as corrected or machine re-recognized; most have
not been checked against the audio, so words, numbers and names can be misheard.
It describes what was said. It cannot establish who voted how, an amount or an outcome — the City's
minutes do that (above).
A time links to its passage, and “Copy link” copies that link. No recording can be started from here.
229 suspect passage(s) marked in place.
How this transcript was made. New machine transcription of the whole recording, with 13 voices separated from the audio.
10 short machine repair(s) (13 word(s)) are labelled in place, with the original words beside them: an ordinary word was replaced only where two further machine readings agreed on a different one.
Checks run on this transcript: the recognizer's own warning signs, whether a voice was detected where the words are and a language review for likely mishearings.
A second, independent machine reading was compared with it word by word: the same words for 90.7% of 8,220 content words.
Dotted words (250 places) are ordinary wording differences: hover or tap to see the other reading.
229 passages (28% of the words) are marked suspect: their words are not shown ("unclear audio") and support no statement: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ; the language review questioned them; or no voice was detected there.
Agreement between two machine readings is not verification.
Speakers were separated by voice. A plain name rests on evidence tied to that voice; “provisional” is a name from an earlier text-only pass and is not verified; “Speaker N” is an unidentified voice.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:00:00–00:00:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:00:51–00:00:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
question that, uh, Charlene and I discussed is whether or not there needs to be two readings of the report that they give to the council. So, so, so if there are two readings, then that date, I think still is the completion date, um, for the first reading would be the council meeting of January 11th. The second reading would be January 25th. And so I don't know, Anthony, if they, if it requires two readings of a report, it's not an ordinance or anything like that. But, but again, um,
can advise you on that if he, if he's, uh, ready to now or sometime in the future there. But the, the due date is, uh, ‸ February 9th. So, um, Mr. Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, we, we've given you three maps, um, and we'll put those on the screen as we discuss those. And we'll, we'll again, tag team this between myself and,
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:02:12–00:02:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. So we're trying to get Tara McHugh and Marshall Flynn. And they're with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. And they're doing the, uh, technical work on, uh, the maps there.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:02:43–00:02:43 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:02:50–00:02:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:03:13–00:03:14 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:03:44–00:03:44 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
this is obviously based on, uh, the current population, but there's, these are the existing maps. Obviously no changes, but the census data, uh, is, um, is,
populated within the maps there. And so you'll see, we talked about this last time. Um, we don't have this to put on the screen, do we? The maps with the, um, with the, with the numbers on the bottom of them. So, so, so, so
if, if just to explain the map that you, that you're the hard copy that you have in front of you, obviously you see all the districts, you see the district boundaries and the legend. You'll see, uh,
district, you'll see the population of the district, you'll see the ideal, uh, population number. And again, that number is 4751. You'll see the deviation, uh, to that number is the, uh, third column.
percentage of the ideal, i.e. where you are, uh, against above or below the, the 4751. And you can see just, just, um, just going down the districts there, percentage of ideal,
district one is a negative, uh, 12.27 against the 4751. District two is, uh, 5.13 above district three is 9.71 above. And then district four is 2.57 below. Um, the next column gives you the number of homes. Uh,
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:05:57–00:06:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:06:24–00:06:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
obviously have to have a jumping off point for your discussion of changes to the current map. And so what we try to do here, what the maps present are the maps, these two maps show ‸ or make the least amount of moves, i.e. the least amount of changes in census tracts and census blocks. And so that's statistically, that's sort of the first criteria that ‸ we use, you know, what's the simplest, what are the simplest moves to make, what are the easiest moves to make, again, with the least amount of moves by ‸ the census
to version A map, you can see that it's pretty close to the same demographics of the current map there. And just let me, by way of example, for ‸ District 1,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:07:42–00:07:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
42.71. So you can see that there is only a .50 shift there. And so, again, those were the sort of the basis for jumping off and giving you discussion maps as a sort of first matter of consideration. So, so you have A, version A, which again, the, if you're looking at your hard copies and now it's on the screen, you'll see the, the areas that are, that are circled or bracketed by the, by the red drawings. Those are, those are the areas that have ‸ moved from one district to another district. And I don't know on the, on your dashboard, Justin, if they, if they care to, if we can zero in on those, but if you want us to, we'll try to get there.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:09:19–00:09:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
And then just to make the same comparison, you'll see on the current map, and I'm going to just use district one, uh, percentage of black on ‸ the current map, it's 43.21. On the version A,
And so this matrix may be a little easier to see. You can see them all together, particularly, uh, as we talk about African American black percentages. And so you can see, um, the changes there and you can see them all those, uh, ‸ that racial, uh,
category within all of the districts, how it's changed between the different versions there. So this may, this is less graphic, but probably a little easier to read when, when taken together across all districts.
Um, yeah, the, the obligation that this commission has is to file a report within 120 days, um, of, of the appointment. So this commission only needs to file a report. That report needs to contain a map and the descriptions of the district boundaries in the form of an ordinance.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:11:54–00:12:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:07–00:12:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:12–00:12:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:12:35–00:12:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:12:51–00:12:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:13:02–00:13:08 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:13:33–00:13:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:13:52–00:14:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:17–00:14:24 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
you come down Michigan to range road. Is that including the cocoa conservation area all the way up the Hooper drive, which is the end of the city line?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:14:38–00:14:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:14:48–00:14:50 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:15:00–00:15:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:15:03–00:15:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:16:03–00:16:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:16:48–00:16:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); the recognizer flagged its own output; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up · 00:17:12–00:17:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:18:01–00:18:07 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:18:08–00:18:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:18:33–00:18:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:16–00:19:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:19:30–00:19:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:20:02–00:20:03 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
wondering if you can speak to that. It's very different between version A and version B. I'm wondering if you can give us a little advance on what drives that.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:20:14–00:20:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
percent total of other is all the other races that are, for instance, Hawaiian Islanders and American Indians and all kinds of different ones that are a small ‸ percentage. And basically what it is is the number is the total population minus the other races that we have listed.
much lower. So even if we're subtracting these other populations from the total population, it still shouldn't result in a thousand less people, right? It should be the same number of other people just redistributed into different districts, correct?
Correct. However, for each district, the other number is what is left over. So I'm looking at A and I'm going to look at B. Yeah, I see what you mean. 1,200. Yeah, okay. So that is not right. That can't be right for B.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:22:09–00:22:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
For instance, ‸ yeah, I've got 1165 for District 2 in the A2 version. Now I know you probably don't have the A2 version in front of you. So this is really just an addition or a subtraction error on this one. Okay.
So could you give us those numbers so that we can pencil them in for the other category? We have four categories. So in the top number for District 1, what should other be?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognized words and the detected speech do not line up; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:16–00:23:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:23:55–00:24:05 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
this is all under other, the 111 to 622 and then in District 4, the 106 to 865, they don't affect any of the other percentages, numbers and percentages.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:24:25–00:24:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
The other numbers of percentages are always as they are. The other ‸ is really a created column because there is no other that exists like that. So basically in the census you have like about five more rows of races that are very small percentages. So this just takes care of them in one lump. So no, it does not affect white, black or Asian.
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said) · 00:24:50–00:24:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yeah, and the percentage of the totals for that, for the other changes obviously also because 902 of the 416, 19 Marshall is 1.95 as opposed to 2. So your percentage total column was wrong also, right?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output · 00:25:42–00:25:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording · 00:25:48–00:26:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words only one machine reading has (possibly not said); numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:03–00:26:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Yes, my question is uh regarding the two categories Asian and other. You've explained that the other is just a conglomeration of those other categories that appear in the census. uh From having looked at the data, uh I get thethe feeling that the
So I wonder what your decision point was when you selected Asian over Hispanic and wouldn't we get a better representation if we had a Hispanic column and then put the Asian population in with the all others?
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:26:59–00:27:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:00–00:27:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:09–00:27:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:27:28–00:27:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; words the first reading may have missed · 00:27:52–00:27:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um I'm wondering if um if there's a concern that a group that self-identifies would ‸ would like to be observed or... And is thatis that what you're pointing to in the question perhaps and that we
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:28:14–00:28:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
i i can I can make a suggestion. Other other maps could be ‸ Just show uh Hispanic and non-Hispanic as kind of like a shaded overlay perhaps or something. um But
Excellent. Our next meeting won't be for a week. So that's more than uh ‸ You have more than enough time. um I guess mrs Mr. City Manager can see to it that that's done. Is that okay? Yes,
because you do have an inclusive uh group here in regards to how they identify themselves. So on the census themselves, when they uh checked, they checked that they were Hispanic or just Hispanic speaking. Are you?
say Caucasian, black or Asian or whatever. And then you, uh it does a question that says, are you Hispanic? Do you speak Spanish? Is that your main language? And then theythey break down languages even further than that. So uh some other languages are actually mentioned in the census as well.
uh and I'd like to point the discussion just a little bit as to uh the thoughts of the commission on these three maps, current population versus version A2.
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:31:11–00:31:12 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:31:25–00:31:25 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
how to look at this. um Because it really kind of breaks down uh the fairness of what we are trying to do. uh And that is to, you know, make sure that um households, being a white, black, Asian, or other, are represented. um I think we really have to, I mean, I know we have to pay attention to, you know, uh as uh Don had mentioned, we want to look at the roads, the, you know, the housing associated with those uh particular blocks.
um That's what I would like to do. I would like to try and see, you know, based on the discussions we've had thus far. Let's overlay that onto, you know, black, white, Asian, other.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:25–00:32:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I think that we had discussed trying to keep neighborhoods that have, then this is what I think you're speaking to, that have a sense of neighborhood intact. um
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:32:34–00:32:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Hills is broken up. And I have walked all of those streets, and that's a neighborhood. um So that is, that's definitely breaking that up. um So it's just north of Dixon. Yeah.
Okay. So that's another consideration of thought. Yeah. um Mr. City Manager, is there any information that's available um to, uh that that explains the uh explosion of, well, I don't want to be presumptive. First and foremost, um I would imagine that the numbers were closer to equal when the last commission uh made their decisions and their suggestions in
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:33:33–00:33:43 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
I imagine that the numbers were more even when they did what they did. Do we have the ability to see what the breakdown was uh in the districts then? Do we have those? Do we have that available? Yeah.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:34:19–00:34:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
4168, so on and so forth. okay I'm curious about the raw numbers because the question that I have in my mind ‸ is uh whether we can think about or consider the factors that led to the numbers being defunct in the first place. um For example, I would imagine that in 2011, when the commission met, that they didn't propose something that led to the numbers looking like this. I would imagine that the numbers were closer together when they made their decision and then something happened in between then and now to cause those numbers to change.
a considering those factors um should be something that we do when we decide on whatever we decide uh to propose to council. Because, for example, if there is explosive growth going on in District
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:26–00:35:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that is going to continue happening because of some trends that are occurring, then it doesn't make sense to accept a proposal that would that would cause District
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:35:37–00:35:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:36:10–00:36:11 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:11–00:36:13 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
go back to 2010, show you the census uh numbers by district. And then what you're asking is how how has it grown from 2010 until the 20 census? um I'm not sure how we're we're going to get there. uh You know, that's that's that's population growth. You know, you can, I guess we can tell you what developments have happened on the on the city side that have been approved and ‸ number ofof uh housing units and things like that. But but to to go back and say the census was in in 2010, it was just by way of example in District
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:54–00:36:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:36:59–00:36:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:37:02–00:37:02 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
is obviously growing the most. And your question is, well, what are the trends over that 10-year period? um I'm not sure how we would get there. If we can get there, we can do some thinking about that. Okay. And you tell me if I got your your sentiment. Yes,
sir, you do. And the reason why I ask is because if we can look at um the approval of certain developments that led to this growth to happen in this way, maybe then we can look at what development we have on the table now that could lead to the numbers changing moving forward and consider that in our decision. Does that make sense?
Yeah. And and I think we talked a little bit about that the last time. Do you do you draw your districts based on the census data that's in now or do is it a combination of census data and predictive growth? And that was a throwing
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:37:57–00:37:59 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:38:08–00:38:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:18–00:38:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:30–00:38:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:38:43–00:38:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:13–00:39:14 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:15–00:39:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:18–00:39:19 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:25–00:39:26 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:39:27–00:39:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that is more subject to annexation, um that has more open land mass that can be built upon and populated. And that is being developed and ‸ has more space for development. And so i I'm not talking about a crystal ball analysis. I'm talking about looking at actual factors um that we have. room for development, actual development that is occurring, um to think about future trends and the possibility for growth. um I
um crystal ball analysis is a metaphor for trying to project. um So what I'm understanding is based on reasonable factors which you mentioned, such as annexation, available vacant land. Yes,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:31–00:40:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:31–00:40:35 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:40:42–00:40:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:40:51–00:40:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
So let let me let me give you some guidance on the legal requirements. Yes, sir. you are The Commission is obligated to draw the district boundary lines based on the 2020 census, not projections.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:41:21–00:41:28 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:41:32–00:41:32 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
constitutional requirement. ‸ if you want this Commission's work to be presumed to be constitutional and done in good faith using traditional district boundaries, I would highly encourage you to
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:41:43–00:41:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
want that. You want that imprimatur on top of your work product. So when you want to consider potential projections in balancing the population totals for each district, my recommendation to you would be balance those populations
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:06–00:42:12 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:42:13–00:42:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:29–00:42:29 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:36–00:42:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:41–00:42:42 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:42:59–00:43:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
backward looking uh process. And uh the reason we do it every 10 years is because of these inevitable changes that take place. And uh we can uh take a very clear-eyed look at it and know that what we come up with today, which is very closely aligned with the most recent population, will not be aligned 10 years from now when we do this again, which is why
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:33–00:43:40 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:43:48–00:43:52 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
uh and bolster some of the other districts so that as we go year by year by year to our next 10 year goal, those numbers stay more closely aligned, although they never will be fully aligned. And uh with regard to what we know has been approved and what we know is being built, it's true that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:19–00:44:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
that we know that there is a significant uh development under construction now out on King Street, out on 520, an apartment development which will add a lot of bedrooms and a lot of people to go with it. uh
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:41–00:44:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:47–00:44:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:54–00:44:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:56–00:44:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:57–00:44:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:44:58–00:44:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:01–00:45:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
also has some room for annexation along King Street if uh anybody expresses an interest in doing that. Now when we look at the undeveloped land in District
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:10–00:45:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
let's not forget that a lot of that land by zoning is commercial. So we won't get a lot of residential development in there above and beyond what we're already doing.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:27–00:45:31 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:31–00:45:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:33–00:45:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:33–00:45:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:52–00:45:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:45:58–00:46:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:46:39–00:46:44 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
any further discussion as to version A2 and version B? um Well, uh as as we've already discussed, it you know, we're seeing some development coming. We understand that
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:03–00:47:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:11–00:47:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:19–00:47:20 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:21–00:47:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
is problematic because it's already far, far, far under. um but um But I think for the most part, I think for the most part, we're on the same page. uh We just need to, uh I guess, cross cross tease and that as and figure out how
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:47:42–00:47:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:47:54–00:47:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:48:02–00:48:02 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:03–00:48:04 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:09–00:48:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:15–00:48:21 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:22–00:48:25 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:38–00:48:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:48:42–00:48:46 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:48:49–00:48:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
because we're understanding the shift, the shift northward, um I think our job is really to do our best to protect the integrity of these communities as we shift northward. Because we see it, um but we want to do as little damage to the sense of community that has been developed in these districts and as little damage to the uh demographic representation of the populations they're in as we shift northward. um Because that that appears to be the clear pattern. And so um it seems that at least two of us are on board with um the idea of erring
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:49:52–00:49:57 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:49:57–00:49:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:50:14–00:50:17 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
so as you look at uh what we're now calling A2, and and Marshall, just to be clear, we're calling the version a A2 because of the changes to the other categories there.
asking, Mr. Stockton. When we look at A2, are we still looking at the exact uh changes that you have on this version A in regards to, you know, how we move the population and the communities? Yeah,
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:34–00:51:39 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
mentioned before. Maybe if we can look at these communities uh in both on both maps. I mean, I think we're... I think the guidance that we've been given as an initial
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:51:57–00:52:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:15–00:52:16 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:52:20–00:52:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:31–00:52:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:33–00:52:34 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:37–00:52:38 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:40–00:52:45 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:46–00:52:47 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:47–00:52:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:48–00:52:48 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:53–00:52:53 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:52:53–00:52:55 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:00–00:53:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:03–00:53:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:03–00:53:03 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:53:10–00:53:11 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
right. So, uh can you know, I really would like to see, you know, what communities are being affected um so that we can look at the demographics of of those particular communities and try and see if we're breaking up uh communities, uh what what's inclusive in that community for us um race is concerned. Okay. and um And then we can kind of have better conversations. I know we're just looking at plus and minus right now, but it would give us some uh some meat to deal with in regards to exactly who we're talking about and what communities we're talking about.
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings; a language review questioned the wording · 00:53:58–00:54:09 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:32–00:54:49 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: words were replaced by a machine repair · 00:54:54–00:54:54 · machine repair: words replaced where two further machine readings agreed (not checked by a person)
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:56–00:54:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:54:57–00:54:58 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
guess, model that will be modified for us to look at more moving forward. And so I think the question right now is, of these two maps that have been presented to us, which one is most acceptable for further discussion? A or B, or do we want to give have them present to us
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:53–00:55:54 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:55:54–00:56:01 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:56:14–00:56:15 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
um I believe that Madam Vice Chair might have um been thinking about a modification of that motion to include both versions A2 and version B. Is that what you were thinking? Because I saw you shaking your head.
Additionally, and I think that it might help us in the next version of the map that we receive, that we zoom in on these um inscribed, red inscribed areas and include the the census block number. um
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:57:31–00:57:36 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
opposed? The motion that is that is uh offered by Mr. Green and seconded by Vice Chair has been approved unanimously. And so we anticipate seeing two maps um
I would just like to submit to ‸ fellow commission members that although the ideal thing is to be able to go out and walk neighborhoods and get a feel for it and all that, we all have our own constraints. I personally find it very helpful to use a tool like Google Maps or uh you know uh some of those things to look at neighborhoods from the air, see where the parks are, see where the churches are, see where the schools are. And it helps me visually make sense of some of those neighborhoods. uh So I would just offer to fellow members that that's something I'll be doing as homework for myself between now and the next meeting, and it might be a good thing for all of us to do.
because the further discussion, I think, should be as to these new proposed maps that we are to see in our next meeting in a week from today. um At this time, unless there's more discussion from the staff, I'll entertain a motion for...
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:16–00:59:18 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:26–00:59:30 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:30–00:59:32 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:33–00:59:33 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:35–00:59:37 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:51–00:59:56 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Flag: numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 00:59:57–01:00:00 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Okay. So Ii guess at our next meeting, we will be expecting um versions of A2 and version B that comport to the motion. um Some information about annexation as well as
Flag: the recognizer flagged its own output; a language review questioned the wording; numbers, amounts, negation or names differ between the machine readings · 01:01:19–01:01:23 · unresolved: the words are not shown (unclear audio); listen to the recording
Transcript revision built 2026-10-27T10:15:41 · 6,182 ordinary words, 2,379 in suspect passages, 13 machine re-recognized.
Ask about this meeting
Use the search to ask a question about this meeting in particular,
or compare it across other meetings in the archive.