San Francisco
Menu

Austin Hunter

Commissioner, San Francisco Commission on the Environment

We identified Hunter’s voice at six meetings.

6 of 9transcribed meetings with their voice identified
1.6min a meeting at the Commission on the Environment, at least
2 of 2present at roll calls, from the clerk
Every roll call

Present at 2 of 2 roll calls at the Commission on the Environment

From the clerk’s own record. We don’t compare members on it.

PresentExcusedAbsentOldest first, 1 square per roll call

Absent 0. Jun 22, 2026 to Aug 24, 2026. The clerk’s record covers 2 of the 9 meetings we hold, through Aug 24, 2026.

Official roll call, from the clerk →
Meetings

Every meeting where we identified Hunter’s voice

Six, newest first. The date opens the meeting; the time plays the video at Hunter’s first remark.

  1. Sep 28, 2026Commission on the Environment0.6 min23:32
  2. Jun 22, 2026Commission on the Environment1.9 min2:13:23
  3. Mar 23, 2026Commission on the Environment5.8 min9:33
  4. Feb 4, 2026Commission on the EnvironmentBudget and spending4.4 min23:23
  5. Jan 6, 2026Commission on the EnvironmentBudget and spending1.2 min1:01:04
  6. Oct 27, 2025Commission on the Environment0.8 min55:28
How we identify who is speaking · blind check, pooled across five cities: of 340 commission lines drawn, 260 right, 4 wrong, 1 unclear, 75 couldn’t be judged

A meeting missing here means we couldn’t attribute the voice, not that Hunter was absent. Claude and Gemini each read every transcript with that day’s roster. A voice gets Austin Hunter’s name only when both agree and a code check finds the name said on, or just before, their turn. Voices our transcripts merge with someone else’s are never attributed, so every count here undercounts what Hunter said. For commissions, of 340 lines drawn, 260 were right, 4 wrong and 1 unclear, and the checkers couldn’t judge 75. We have since removed the voices behind 64 of those lines (3 wrong, 0 unclear, the rest we had already held for other reasons). Of the 276 lines we still publish, the checkers could judge 228: 226 right, 1 wrong and 1 unclear (90% lower bound 0.97). They couldn’t judge the other 48. The check is one sample pooled across the five cities, not of Hunter or of San Francisco alone.