►
From YouTube: Redistricting Advisory Commission Meeting - 04/06/22
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
B
A
B
D
B
C
A
B
B
C
B
A
B
C
C
C
The
excel
the
actual
xl,
instead
of
like
an
actual
like
pdf,
because
some
of
the
things
I
would
do
is
like
I
would
get
rid
of
the
ones
that
I've
already
checked.
I
would
keep
a
running
map
and
pivot
on
like
or
running
excel,
based
on,
like
what
I've
already
looked
like
it's
just
like
eric.
I've
spent
an
inordinate
amount
of
time
going
through
each
of
the
maps
that
I
could
find
that
have
been
submitted
and
then
being
like
need
to
look
at
later
need
not
to,
and
then
I
have
like
columns
and
whatnot.
C
C
A
C
C
F
I
wanted
to
say
that
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
trying
to
in
the
last
meeting
eric
lopez
that
you
were
not
able
to
join.
I
was
talking
a
lot
about
keeping
communities
of
interest
on
the
west
side
together,
but
it
just
like
it's
the
boundaries
that
make
sense
like
it
doesn't
end
up
being
a
map
that
is
submittable.
C
Yeah,
I
have
all
nine
of
these
pulled
up
and,
as
I
like,
moved
through
them,
there
were
like
these
small
variances
here.
There's
one
really
radical
map.
That
neil
did
that.
I
absolutely
love,
but
I
know
I
don't
know
how
the
city
council
would
take,
but
it
is
it's.
It's
a
really
great
map.
The
boundaries
are
really
nice
and
succinct.
Its
compactness
is
really
high
up
there.
C
I
think
it
has
two
or
11
like
split
blocks,
and
it
like
makes
sense
based
on
like
population
split
and
the
deviance
between
all
the
the
districts
is
very,
very
minimal,
like
less
than
100
per
district,
and
I
was
like
that's
pretty
sharp
so
and
instead
of
like
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
the
maps,
go
horizontal.
This
one
goes
vertical
and
it's
districting
and
I
was.
I
was
really
impressed
it
tickled.
My
fancy.
C
C
C
C
F
So
eric
we
didn't
end
up
doing
like
a
field
trip.
I
just
sent
an
email
with.
I
saw
that
like
where'd,
you
go
and
I
think
ann
might
be
the
only
one
that
went
and
and
and
saw
and
reported
back
last
time
that
she
understood.
You
know
those
like
kind
of
the
barriers
or
the
bounds
that
we're
talking
about
with
the
railroad
and
the
freeways
and.
C
C
C
B
B
C
C
It's
a
city
council
districts
map,
and
I
really
liked
that
districts,
one
and
two
were
kind
of
kept
really
close
together,
and
there
is
this
dividing
line
with
beck
street
kind
of
going
down
district,
two
kind
of
bleeds
over
and
there's
some
of
the
boundaries.
This
is
not
my
favorite
favorite
map
and,
as
you
can
see,
there's
some
of
the
boundaries
in
district
2
here
that
are
are
a
little
weird
and
they
kind
of
cut
off
certain
blocks.
C
But
overall
I
felt
I
thought
that
it
was
pretty
interesting.
The
compactness
is
good.
The
block
split
is
good,
but
this
to
me
is
kind
of
the
majority
of
the
maps
that
I
see
where
districts,
one
and
two
are
kind
of
messed
around
with
in
more
or
less
fashion,
and
this,
like
backstreet,
dividing
line,
is
kind
of
where
people
either
kind
of
go
across
or
go
go
back.
C
Some
of
the
things
I
didn't
like
about
it
was
that,
even
though
it's
within
the
five
percent
deviance
range
district,
two
and
district
one
don't
gain
as
much,
but
I
I
don't
think
that
that's
a
big
thing
to
kind
of
focus
on
anyway,
but
it's
kind
of
interesting
that,
like
district
four
and
district
six,
have
have
a
little
bit
more
on
the
positive
side
of
that
this
other
map.
Here
I
really
really
like
this
is
actually
one
of
my
favorites,
and
this
is
by
neil.
C
Community
council
districts
are
pretty
well
represented
again.
This
map
is
pretty
pretty
radical
when
we
think
about
it,
because
two
is
taking
up
a
large
swath
of
what
four
traditionally
was
and
is
more
centered
in
the
city,
and
then
six
becomes
more
on
the
west
side
and
kind
of
contains
rose
park,
fair
park
and
and
jordan
meadows
morton
meadows
area.
C
C
C
I
thought
it
was
an
interesting
take
not
again
not
my
favorite
favorite
map,
but
it's
definitely
worth
pursuing,
and
I
think
eric
builds
upon
this
as
he
kind
of
goes.
Here's
his
third
one
and
it
kind
of
teases.
Back
and
again,
this
backstreet
line
here
becomes
a
good
dividing
line
and
district
one
kind
of
dips
into
what
traditionally
has
been
district.
C
H
C
The
deviance
is
pretty
well
represented
and
it
is
super
tight
in
terms
of
where
the
actual
boundaries
are.
But
one
thing
to
kind
of
note
is
that
this
boundary
here
for
district
2
and
up
here
I
still
find
these
to
be
very
weird
and
there
there
are
some
maps
that
kind
of
address
district,
1
and
district
2
and
the
way
that
their
boundaries
are
better
than
others.
This
one
I
find.
C
I
I
really
really
like
it's
compelling
to
me,
but
I
also
find
this
little
sliver
here
near
district
3
to
be
to
be
kind
of
weird
here's.
Another
map
that
I
really
really
like.
This
is
the
second
draft
by
by
eric,
and
I
I
like
the
way
that
it's
kind
of
verticalized
and
compacted
some
of
the
the
districts
like
I
would
have
never
thought
to
make
district
one,
this
big
and
then
make
district
two
like
this,
but
it
it
makes
sense
and
it's
a
fresh
take
on
some
of
the
city
council
districts.
C
C
C
C
D
G
C
G
C
I
think
I
could
speak
for
for
district
2
a
little
bit
and
actually
marty
can
speak
for
district
2
better
than
I
can.
But
I
think
that
you
know
traditionally.
District
2
has
thought
of
themselves
as
a
hard
stop
with
the
railroad,
but
would
not
be
offended
if
it
went
past
that
into
like
the
granary
and
also
like
ballpark
areas,
because
I
feel
there
is
kind
of
a
continuum
and
feel
past
the
railroad
into
those
neighborhoods.
C
F
G
G
C
I
think
where
that
starts,
to
break
down,
and
especially
on
the
west
side,
is
fair
park.
Currently
it
is
represented
or
split
if
we're
just
looking
at
community
council
boundaries
between
districts,
one
to
two
or
city
council
districts,
one
two
and
three-
and
that
has
always
been
a
bugaboo
to
me.
The
way
that
is,
but
I
totally
understand
where
they're
actually
situated
and
the
kind
of
makeup
of
what
of
what's
there
and
some
of
the
maps
that
I've
liked
have
done
a
great
job
of
looking
at
some
of
the
city.
Sorry
community.
H
C
G
It
does
it
does,
but
it
doesn't.
Is
there
any
other
way?
I
I
mean
if,
if
you're
satisfied
with
the
way
the
map
is
and
you're
wanting
to
make
no
changes
in
districts,
one
or
two,
then
we
have
to
make
other
changes
in
other
districts
in
order
to
get
other
community
councils
of
interest
having
some
semblance
of
being
in
one
or
two
council
districts,
not
three
or
four,
as
east
central
was
being
divided
into.
E
G
C
B
C
D
C
C
I
think
that's
what
it's
going
to
come
down
to,
just
based
on
the
way
that
this
map
is
laid
out
now,
because
if
we
look
at
districts,
one
and
two
based
on
your
map,
it's
negative
499,
which
is
great
because
it's
within
the
deviation
range.
But
district
2
is
definitely
suffering
with
negative
2
000
in
terms
of
representation,
while
district
4
has
over
representation
based
on
the
target
number
that
we're
looking
at.
So
the
equitable
distribution
needs
to
come
from
from
somewhere.
C
And
if
I
were
a
betting
man.
If
you're
looking
at
to
to
make
some
adjustments
in
district
2,
I
think
that
we
would
align
less
with
with
district
3
somewhat
with
district
4,
but
it
may
be
a
better
fit
to
make
that
adjustment
in
district
5
and
in
district
4.,
just
in
terms
of
like
feel
and
the
way
that
people
like
kind
of
align
themselves
or
would
feel
like
this
is
a
neighbor
that
I
would
would
have
more
in
common
with
than
this
other
neighbor.
If
you
can
say.
C
F
C
D
C
C
Eric
did
a
very,
very
good
first
stab
with
18
maps,
and
I
think
that's
kind
of
a
bite-sized
chunk
of
things,
and
I
took
the
majority
of
his
list
actually
all
of
it,
because
I
I
see
very
closely
eye
to
eye
with
him
as
far
as
like
that
is
concerned,
from
what
I've
seen
of
the
maps
and
a
little
bit
down
to
nine
and
have
sent
them
out
to
everybody.
But
we
want
to
come
to
like.
Can
we
can
we
go
from
like
18
to
nine
nine,
to
like
three
to
five?
Something
like
that?
C
C
A
C
F
Well,
I
guess
that
depends
if
anybody
I
haven't
had
it.
I've
been
in
meetings
all
day,
so
I
haven't
had
a
chance
to
look
at
them.
Does
anyone
have
a
contrary
opinion,
though,
would
they
have
a
vote?
Yes
to
one
of
his
nose?
I
mean,
then
that
could
be
an
interesting
dialogue,
but
otherwise
I'm
fine
with
that
kind
of
rule
of
thought.
C
You
know,
and
I
think,
those
other
districts
that
got
some
of
those
edges
there
would
be
just
fine.
It
wouldn't
really
matter,
but
I
mean
neil
has
these
are
very
thoughtful
comments
and
it
did
give
me
a
moment
of
pause,
as
I
was
looking
at
them
to
say
like
well,
I
don't
really
know
but-
and
I
didn't
even
consider-
eric's
zero
four
one,
even
though
neil
said
yes
to
that.
C
C
B
C
I
do
think
like
when
we
get
to
this
eric's
community
council
boundaries,
one
which
wasn't
in
my
top
nine
neil
makes
a
very
compelling
argument
about
why
it
should
be,
and
I
like
didn't,
think
of
it
in
those
terms
about
the
the
the
what
is
it
the
temple
square
district,
but
that
is
actually
a
really
like
when
we
talk
about
neighborhood
feel,
I
think
that's
a
really
good
argument
for
that.
So,
but.
C
C
C
Too
bad
it
was
for
work.
This
is
the
one.
This
is
one
of
the
ones
that
I
put
in
my
top
nine,
even
though
it
was
a
little
bit
funky.
I'm
sorry,
I'm
like
butting
in
already
making
commentary,
even
though
I
thought
that
district
one
had
some
like
funky
parts
with
capitol
hill.
I
still
thought
this
was
actually
really
compelling,
because
I
think
that
rose
park
area
actually
has
a
natural
feel
and
bleed
over
into
that
small
little
capitol
hill.
E
E
I
went
up
a
little
farther
north
well,
not
farther
like
just
looked
over
farther,
but
there's
a
lot
between
that
sliver
and
rose
park.
So
anyone
that
has
this
little
jog
going
to
rose
park
as
much
as
I
as
much
as
I
want
to
be
a
part
of
that
community.
I
don't
think
we
are
because
there's
too
many
physical
barriers.
C
G
E
F
C
H
B
Yeah,
I
think
that's
I
think
the
like
the
freeway
is
really
the
the
big
issue
and
the
freeway
is
that
left
side
of
the
map,
so
where
the
that
the
left
black
line
is
that's
where
the
freeway
goes.
So
it's
and
it's
like,
as
marty,
was
saying
last
time
it
was
it's
like
or
no
it
was
it
was.
Was
it
marty
or
mallory?
What
mallory?
I
think
you
were
talking
about
how
it's
like
walls
like
the
freeway
is,
like
literal
walls,.
B
C
G
B
Yeah,
I
still
included
back
street
into
district
one
so
which
and
there's
600
people
that
live
in
that
that
that
track,
so
it's
like
they're
gonna
be
completely
cut
off
from
their
district.
Like
I,
you
know,
after
last
week's
discussion
of
us
talking
about
this,
I
actually
don't
like
most
of
my
early
maps,
because
it
doesn't,
it
puts
that
sliver
all
the
way
over
the
freeway
in
district
one,
and
I
actually
don't
like
having
that
after
after
mallory's
very
impassioned
discussion
about
it.
B
C
B
B
E
E
B
B
Not
play
that
for
nat
four
yeah.
I
think
there
could
be
some
work
with
map4
that
could
make
that
work
if
we
wanted
to
go
this
sort
of
vertical
splitting
of
downtown
this
way.
But
neil
made
a
good
point
about
how
really
that
that
sort
of
central
core,
like
the
central
downtown
and
the
east
central
feel
more
aligned
than
like
I
would
down
in
central
ninth
with,
like.
B
I
don't
necessarily
feel
part
of
that
sort
of
like
downtown
area,
but
what
I
do
feel
I
feel
more
aligned
with
that
with
the
west
side
of
downtown
so
like
where,
like
the
the
meridian,
is,
and
the
the
milagro
and
all
of
those
sort
of
on
that
sort
of
like
second
last
third
west.
Fourth
west.
All
of
those
apartments,
I
feel
more
aligned
with
those
than
I
do
at
like
second
east.
B
H
B
It's
really
the
sliver
daniel.
It's
really
that
sliver
that's
west
of
the
freeway
or
east
of
the
freeway
in
district
one
okay,
after
our
discussion
last
week,
we're
just
kind
of
like
that
doesn't
make
sense
to
be
on
the
west
side,
because
it's
it's
separated
literally
by
walls,
okay,
so
any
map
that
kind
of
has
that
we're
kind
of
like
man.
A
C
Yeah,
I
I
think
if
I
was
going
to
make
more
intelligent
commentary
on
it
than
the
non-intelligent
commentary
I
made
last
time
as
I
was
like.
Oh,
this
is
a
really
nice
looking
map.
Is
that
boundary
in
district
one
where
it's
going
on
seven
like
emory
street
700?
If
you
want
to
push
that
back
to
indiana
and
redwood
and
keep
that
as
part
of
district
two.
H
C
F
C
C
F
H
H
C
That's
what
I'm
worried
about.
I
didn't
even
look
at
any
of
the
population
blocks
here,
but
let
me
just
take
a
quick
look.
Yeah,
that's
going
to
be
a
little
hefty
of
an
uplift,
but
I
feel
that
I
feel
that
the
padding
between
district
1
and
district
2
can
actually
take
that
just
eyeballing
it
okay,
so
marty.
F
B
B
H
F
H
G
H
Which,
I
would
argue
if
well
maybe,
actually,
this
is
arguable,
so
I'm
sure
there's
a
counter
argument,
but
if
we
were
to,
I
feel
like
proper
globe,
sometimes
it
feels
like
it
could
always
go
either
way,
so
we're
thinking
about
a
neighborhood
identity.
I
see
it's
its
connection
to
fair
park.
Still,
you
know,
since
part
of
it
is
on
this
side
and
then
glendale's
always
been
its
own,
almost
like
its
own
identity.
So
I
could
see
a
split
there.
F
Well-
and
I
think
what
naturally
happens
so
you
know
when
glendale
included
poplar
grove
before
the
community
councils
had
a
falling
out
and
there
was
this
division
and
that's
how
poplar
grove
came
about.
You
know
a
lot
of
people
who've
been
on
the
west
side
for
a
really
long
time.
They
don't
even
acknowledge
poplar
grove
or
fair
park,
they're
like
it's
glendale
and
it's
rose
park
and
that's
it.
Those
are
the
those
are
the
communities
and
and.
H
F
Yeah,
so
there's
that
interesting
kind
of
thing
too,
when
I'm
like
popular
grove,
exists
like
we
are
here,
you
know,
but
so
I
think
keeping
poplar
grove
for
me
over
with
glendale,
like
is
more
of
a
natural
connection
than
poplar
grove
with
fair
park.
But
of
course
I
live
closer
to
glendale.
So
I
feel
like
that's
the
connection
there
so
and
maybe
because
it's
like
our
history,
that
we
used
to
all
be
one.
So
I
kind
of
think
along
those
lines
a
bit.
H
Is
it
fair
to
say
that,
unlike
that
that
guadalupe
neighborhood
in
that
part
of
rose
park
that
always
that
that
feel
very
connected
to
that
you
know
district
area?
What
I'm
hearing
you
say
is
that
popular
grove,
it's
also
its
own
identity,
that
it's
connected
more
to
glendale.
But
if
you
were
to
split
them,
it's
still
its
own
piece.
Maybe
they
could
go
either
way.
F
I
think
where
I
get
a
little
bit
more
nervous
is
when
we
come
into
a
different
like
downtown
and
I
think
downtown's
needs
and
the
west
side
of
salt
lake
are
very
different,
although,
as
we
grow
and
things
you
know,
will
morph
and
change,
but
I
do
think
we
have
distinct
differences,
and
so
a
council
member
who
who
understands
the
west
side
of
salt
lake.
I
think
you
could
divide
and
play
with
us
over
here
a
little
and
our
needs,
and
our
voices
would
still
be
heard.
F
It's
when
you
start
to
take
like
like
if
you
were
to
take
fair
park
and
rose
park
and
put
those
over
with
downtown
or
I
mean
I
would
be
like
up
in
arms
and
be
like
no,
no,
no,
no
right
because
downtown
and
fair
park
don't
have
that
much
in
common.
So
I'm
okay
with
this,
this
interesting
slicing
in
these
directions,
like
I
think
it's
it's
interesting
and
it's
and
I
feel
like
it
works.
B
F
F
Think,
like
sorry-
and
I
know
that
the
river
is
like
this
natural
that
I
do
think,
the
railroad
tracks
should
be,
if
possible,
and
I
played
with
it
and
I
never
could
get
it
to
work.
But
the
railroad
track
really
is
the
natural
divide,
not
because,
like
I
walk
on
the
jordan
river
every
day,
and
it's
like
as
big
as
my
arm
like
it's
just
not
enough
of
a
natural
divide.
F
B
D
C
E
I
don't
know,
I
think
it's
a
good
idea.
It's
a
good
thought
experiment
if
nothing
else
to
make
them
kind
of
think
in
a
slightly
different
way,
and
I
would
also
argue
kind
of
the
district
3
going
below
south
temple.
You
know
farther
west
does
make
sense,
because
there's
been
some
pretty
intense
development
along
that
area.
That
also
is
similar
to
what
we've
got
going
on
up
in
my
tract,
so
kind
of
the
the
western
and
southern
boundaries
of
this
would
have
some
pretty
intense
of
district.
E
E
G
E
To
you
know,
16
units
go
in
at
least
so
it's
yeah
that
kind
of
the
back
street
I'm
trying
to
like
point
you
out
to
the
road,
but
that
back
street
kind
of
sliver
and
then
going
down
to
north
and
south
temple
one
it's
a
commuter
corridor
so
like
we
all,
are
very
frustrated
by
all
of
the
commuters
as
well.
We
have
that
shared
interest
of
being
on
some
udot
roads
that
the
city
doesn't
always
get
to
regulate,
but
there's
yeah.
I
think
I
think
it
makes
sense
in
either
spot
so.
E
C
I
would
like
to
see
how
the
numbers
play
out,
but
so
far
I
I
really
like
it.
I
think,
to
daniel
and
marty's
point.
I
really
love
having
my
orientation
of
city
council
districts
go
vertical
like
that,
and
I
I
think
it's
kind
of
fresh,
but
that's
not
the
only
consideration.
I
think
it
does
a
really
good
job
of
balancing
out
a
lot
of
community
dynamics
that
we've
been
talking
about,
and
people
have
voiced
like
where
it
can
change
and
it's
actually
very
viable
to
make
those
edit.
It
feels
like.
H
I
can
add
something
to
that
argument
or
in
addition
to
and
the
other
maps
that
we've
had,
I,
I
guess
I
was
feeling
this
and
didn't
know
really
how
to
articulate
it.
Until
I
saw
this,
it
was
feeling
like
in
the
west
side,
neighborhood
there's
a
particular
area
where
we
can
shifting
the
boundaries
it
was
it
always
it
kind
of
felt
like
it's
always
this
neighborhood
that
gets.
You
know
like
screwed
in
one
way
or
another.
For
sorry,
it's
been
a
long
day.
H
F
C
F
C
A
C
B
D
D
D
D
H
C
H
F
H
H
F
H
H
For
me,
it's
the
600,
the
600
north
boundary
that
moves
you
into
district,
one
that
you
know
so
on
on
on
the
if
we
stay
on,
where
is
it
even
if
we
stay
on
900
west
right
between
900,
west
and
even
1200
west
right?
That's
fifth,
is
it's
it's
that
it's
a
that's
a
really
community
of
interest
that
stays
together
on
both
sides
of
600
north,
so
that
line
feels
I
can
see
why
it
might
feel
like
a
natural
line,
but
it
splits
down
what
I
I
perceive
to
be
rose
park.
C
North
temple
is
where
I
would
say,
the
natural
dividing
line
between
that
is,
and
that's
where
I've
usually
been
like
the
non-rancho
market
side
of
north
temple
is
like
oh,
that's,
popular
grove
area
and
then
once
I
cross
over
and
I'm
near
rancho
market,
I'm
like
oh
I'm
in
rose
park.
That's
how
I
naturally
felt
about
it.
I
I
I
can't
agree
with
that.
F
I
think,
with
all
those
apartments
being
built,
though,
on
north
temple,
it's
starting
to
feel
like
I'm,
not
sure
I
mean
and
we're
doing
this
based
on
2020
census,
so
based
on
that,
so
in
2020.
That
was
a
true
statement
in
2022,
it's
starting
to
feel
less
so,
but
if
we're
doing
it
based
on
2020
census,
yes,.
C
I
feel
this
is
compelling
in
a
lot
of
ways,
and-
and
I
like
it,
because
it
and
neil
neil
articulated
this
perfectly
there's
a
lot
of
bold
maneuvers
here
that
don't
feel
out
of
place,
even
if
I
have
been
accustomed
to
thinking
about
north
temple.
As
that
split
you
know,
neil
had
mentioned
in
his
comments
about
including
ballpark
in
district
four,
and
I
feel
the
same
way
about
the
way
that
district
two
is
carved
up
in
that
little
horn
area.
I
like
it.
It
feels
a
little
subversive.
C
H
C
D
So
you
have
enough
to
move
it
forward
and
I'll
go
ahead
and
include
it
on
the
list
and
then
just
since
I
am
talking
sorry
about
that
chair,
based
on
what
you
had
listed
as
your
top
set
and
then
the
yeses
from
neil
and
the
comment
from
ann.
You
have
16
right
now
that
would
move
forward,
but
I
know
we
haven't
heard
from
everyone.
D
C
C
D
C
E
I
liked
this
one
because
we
worked
on
it
together.
Last
week
you
know,
and
so
there
were
like
there
were
things
that
I
think
could
be
integrated
into
a
different
map
like
maybe
it
gets
smooshed
together
with
the
one
that
anne
worked
with
ben
and
hassan
on
somehow,
because
I
thought
yeah
kind
of
navigating
the
one
and
two
split
and
then
a
little
bit
of.
I
can't
remember
the
other
things,
but
it
felt
like
it
was
a
everyone
kind
of
coming
together
to
try
to
deal
with
the
community
input
that
we
received.
E
D
C
I'm
just
taking
a
quick
look
again
because
my
my
initial
reaction
was
also
akin
to
marty's,
even
when
I
looked
over
the
community
council
overlay,
but
I
mean
one
thing
that
I
think
is
really
great
about
when
I'm
looking
at
the
overlay
of
community
councils,
you
guys
have
addressed
an
issue
and
very
very
great.
I
should
add
about
making
sure
that
city
council
representation
within
the
community
councils
is
is
pretty
fair.
C
The
fair
park
community
council
is
going
to
then
be
represented
mostly
by
district
2
and
then
district
4,
which
I
think
is
a
little
bit
uneven,
but
other
than
that
like
looking
at
it.
I
think
this
actually
works
out
really
well,
and
I
really
don't
have
any
concern
about
the
district.
Seven
like
it's
going
to
the
upper
limit
of
the
deviation
like
you
pointed
out
marty,
but
I
can
live
with
that.
G
G
B
C
B
B
G
H
C
C
Maybe
if
we
think
about
this
and
whittling
it
down
to
like
a
top
five,
it
probably
wouldn't
be
in
that
thing,
but
if
we
have
to
go
ahead
and
present
methodology
and
talk
through
it,
this
is
a
very
good
counterpoint
to
then
bolster
the
opinion
of
other
maps
that
we
do
want
to
see
and
say
hey.
If
we
take
this
as
a
map
that
is
trying
to
really
be
felicitous
to
the
to
the
community
councils.
H
C
C
H
How
far
south
on
the
tracks
are
you
thinking
that
eric?
Is
there
a
difference?
I'm
thinking,
because
in
terms
of
population,
I
can
see
it
not
being
a
bearer.
But
what
we're
thinking
about?
I
guess
density
yeah,
don't
see
as
much
density
on
the
west
side
and
then
there's
that
you
know
that
in
a
lot
of
industry,
but
of
course,
I'm
thinking
like
1300,
even
1700
up.
B
Yeah
I
mean
if
you
got
quote
like
if
you
got,
I
would
say:
if
you
got
down
to
1300
and
you
wanted
to
follow
it
there.
I
would
say
that
would
be
okay,
but
not
not
at
night.
Not
until
you
get
to
13th,
because
I
mean
yeah
there's
I
mean
if
you
wanted
to
go
the
the
freeway,
so
the
the
freeway
bridge-
that's
right
here
like
maybe
maybe
because
at
that
point
it
really
does
turn
into
industrial
at
that
point
to
the
to
the
west
of
the
tracks.
B
H
B
H
H
And
that's
what
I
mean
in
terms
of
so
I
see
the
argument.
I'm
also
thinking
in
that
corridor
between
you
know
third,
west
and
the
tracks
yeah,
the
density
there
at
the
moment
or
before
I
think
it's
slightly
grown.
But
if
we're
going
off
of
the
census
maps,
it
doesn't
it's.
I
guess
I'm
thinking
in
terms
of
of
neighborhood
impact
right,
yeah.
B
B
C
H
C
C
B
C
C
C
F
C
C
E
C
There's
that
the
notch
in
district
four
right,
yep,
okay,
yeah
yeah-
and
if
you
want
to
work
on
your
amended
one-
to
adjust
districts,
two
and
four-
to
hit
the
equal
ability
factors.
If
you
wanted
to
put
that
up
for
us
to
take
a
look
at
it
and
either
put
in
the
bucket
or
not
do
you
think
you
can
get
that
done
by
tomorrow?.
G
H
C
G
C
Well,
it
depends
on
a
few
things
like
well.
It
depends
on
this.
If
you
can,
if
you
want
to
spend
the
time
to
adjust
districts,
two
three
and
four
and
you're
committed
to
that
then
yeah.
I
would
love
to
put
it
on
deck,
but
if
you're
like
no,
I
want
to
toss,
and
I
want
to
focus
on
the
cc
adjustment
one.
Then
we
don't
need
to
have
a
vote
since
this
doesn't
meet
the
eligibility
requirements.
C
Okay,
cool:
are
there
any
other
maps
that
we
want
to
go
over
because
we
have?
We
went
over
the
majority
of
the
pending
and
unfinished
business
maps,
but
I
would
like
to
get
to
any
of
those
that
we
haven't
touched
if
we
need
to
go
over
any
of
them
and
then
talk
quickly
about
new
business
and
then
go
to
adjournment
since
we
have
15
minutes
so.
C
C
C
All
right,
so
I'm
going
to
take
it
from
the
commissioners,
there's
no
other
maps
that
we
want
to
review
currently
in
our
reports
of
the
working
group
in
section
d
and
I'm
going
to
move
us
forward.
Unless
anybody
stops
me
into
pending
an
unfinished
business,
we
have
gone
over
one
two,
three
and
four
community
council
boundaries.
C
We
did
not
touch
neil's,
52
and
59,
since
he
kind
of
excluded
that
and
for
the
time
being
like
we,
I
believe
that
everybody
was
like
okay
with
doing
that,
tacitly
at
least
we
went
over
the
we
didn't
go
over
55.
I
don't
think
we
talked
about
that,
but
we
went
over
for
change,
map
politely
compact
and
then
the
minimal
change
map
is
a
staff
one
that
says
this
is
the
only
thing
you
need
to
do.
G
C
E
I'm
just
wondering
if
we're
getting
the
ones
that
you
mentioned
to
look
at
tonight,
because
we
gotta
decide
tomorrow,
so
we
can't
like
have
a
you
know:
15
minute
work
session
on
each
map.
We
just
need
to
be
able
to
look
at
them
and
if
we're
going
to
combine
things
combine
things
but
have
it,
we
got
to
keep
it
moving
tomorrow.
C
Yeah
I
sent
over
an
excel
spreadsheet,
the
ones
that
I
was
going
to
talk
to.
So
everybody
can
take
a
look
at
that.
Okay
and
that
was
sent
earlier
in
the
meeting.
I
just
quickly
piggybacked
off
another
email,
so
yeah
to
your
point,
mallory
we're
just
going
to
be
clipping
and
clopping,
and
if
people
have
other
maps
that
they
want
to
talk
about,
get
them
in
an
excel
spreadsheet
circulate
them
to
us
before
the
meeting.
F
G
B
D
See
it
now,
okay,
so
we
have,
those
in
blue
are
confirmed
to
go
forward.
Those
that
are
still
listed
but
not
highlighted,
were
mentioned
during
the
conversation
tonight,
but
not
voted
on.
So
I'm
down.
I
this
count
is
not
correct.
Please
don't
look
at
these
numbers
and
from
what
I
understood
the
plan
was
that
we
would
get
to
25
tonight.
I'm
happy
to
provide
those
links
to
you
tonight
and
then
tomorrow,
you'd
get
down
to
five.
Now
I'm
jumping
in
halfway.
D
F
D
So
there,
so
when
we
look
at
this,
can
you
see
this
excel
spreadsheet?
You
should
be
able
to
see
this
okay,
so
this
one
highlights
those
that
eric
went
over
and
then
those
that
neil
suggested
and
then
also
the
one
that
anne
had
and
then
those
that
were
on
the
agenda
when
I
put
them
all
together
in
combination.
C
D
No
chair,
I
lean
on
you,
I'm
sorry.
I
lean
on
your
direction
on
if
you
want
to
add
more,
I'm
happy
to
get
the
17
out,
but
I'm
I'm
also
happy
to
take
more
and
I
am
comfortable
with
ben
as
well
acknowledging
like
we're
here
to
support
the
commission.
We
can
stay
later,
but
I
know
that
it's
a
lot
of
work.
You
guys
have
to
do.
C
C
F
B
B
F
C
B
C
There
go
with
that
we'll
go
on
to
new
business.
The
spreadsheet
was
sent
out
earlier
in
the
meeting,
so
I
don't
think
we
need
to
go
over
that.
That
will
just
that's
the
whole
list
of
maps,
the
whole
hundred
and
some
odd
total.
If
you
have
some
time
just
click
through
and
you'll,
probably
notice
like
eric
had
said
earlier
in
the
meeting.
A
lot
of
them
are
duplicates
a
lot
of
them.