Irina Ozernoy

Vice chair, Seat 2, San Francisco Animal Control and Welfare Commission

We identified Ozernoy’s voice at three meetings.

3 of 8transcribed meetings with their voice identified

6 of 6present at roll calls through May 14, 2026, from the clerk

Every roll call, and Ozernoy’s other bodies

Present at 6 of 6 roll calls at the Animal Control and Welfare Commission, roll call through May 14, 2026

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

PresentExcusedAbsentOldest first, 1 square per roll call

Absent 0. Nov 13, 2025 to May 14, 2026. The clerk’s record covers 6 of the 8 meetings we hold, through May 14, 2026.

Official roll call, from the clerk →

Animal Control and Welfare Commission: talk time not compared. Fewer than four members can be compared fairly.

Meetings

Every meeting where we identified Ozernoy’s voice

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

May 14, 2026Animal Control and Welfare Commission2.3 min35:58
Mar 12, 2026Animal Control and Welfare Commission3.0 min9:26
Feb 12, 2026Animal Control and Welfare Commission1.1 min5:47

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 Ozernoy was absent. Claude and Gemini each read every transcript with that day’s roster. A voice gets Irina Ozernoy’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 Ozernoy 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 Ozernoy or of San Francisco alone.