San Francisco
Menu

Brian Larkin

Member, San Francisco General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee

We identified Larkin’s voice at four meetings.

4 of 6transcribed meetings with their voice identified
4 of 5present at roll calls through Jun 8, 2026, from the clerk
Every roll call, and Larkin’s other bodies

Present at 4 of 5 roll calls at the General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee, roll call through Jun 8, 2026

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

PresentExcusedAbsentOldest first, 1 square per roll call

Absent 1. Oct 27, 2025 to Jun 8, 2026. The clerk’s record covers 5 of the 6 meetings we hold, through Jun 8, 2026.

Official roll call, from the clerk →
Meetings

Every meeting where we identified Larkin’s voice

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

  1. Apr 13, 2026General Obligation Bond Oversight CommitteeBudget and spending1.0 min24:00
  2. Feb 9, 2026General Obligation Bond Oversight CommitteeHealth and behavioral health7.7 min1:01:50
  3. Dec 8, 2025General Obligation Bond Oversight CommitteeBudget and spending1.6 min16:31
  4. Oct 27, 2025General Obligation Bond Oversight Committee1.5 min7:26
How we identify who is speaking · blind check, pooled across five cities: of 410 council lines drawn, 352 right, 0 wrong, 1 unclear, 57 couldn’t be judged

A meeting missing here means we couldn’t attribute the voice, not that Larkin was absent. Claude and Gemini each read every transcript with that day’s roster. A voice gets Brian Larkin’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 Larkin said. For councils and their committees, of 410 lines drawn, 352 were right, 0 wrong and 1 unclear, and the checkers couldn’t judge 57. We have since removed the voices behind 110 of those lines (0 wrong, 1 unclear, the rest we had already held for other reasons). Of the 300 lines we still publish, the checkers could judge 268: all 268 right (90% lower bound 0.99). They couldn’t judge the other 32. The check is one sample pooled across the five cities, not of Larkin or of San Francisco alone.