Pamela Nagle

Member, San Francisco Urban Forestry Council

We identified Nagle’s voice at one meeting.

1 of 3transcribed meetings with their voice identified

3 of 3present at roll calls through Feb 24, 2026, from the clerk

Every roll call, and Nagle’s other bodies

Present at 3 of 3 roll calls at the Urban Forestry Council, roll call through Feb 24, 2026

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

PresentExcusedAbsentOldest first, 1 square per roll call

Absent 0. Oct 28, 2025 to Feb 24, 2026. The clerk’s record covers 3 of the 6 meetings we hold, through Feb 24, 2026.

Official roll call, from the clerk →

Urban Forestry Council: talk time not compared. Seated for only 3 meetings in 12 months.

Neighborhoods Nagle named

One place Nagle named in meetings

Lines where Nagle named the place, read by two AI readers that both agree it means that place. Each dot plays the newest one; brighter means named more often.

San Francisco

Bernal Heights 1 time

Places are drawn at the centre of their own boundary in the city’s Analysis Neighborhoods file (DataSF (City and County of San Francisco)). A dot says the place was named, not where Nagle was or what was said about it.

Meetings

Every meeting where we identified Nagle’s voice

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

May 22, 2026Urban Forestry Council3.7 min7:11

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