San Francisco
Menu

Paul Woolford

Commissioner, San Francisco Public Works Commission

We identified Woolford’s voice at nine meetings.

9 of 14transcribed meetings with their voice identified
9 of 9present at roll calls through Jul 23, 2026, from the clerk
Every roll call, and Woolford’s other bodies

Present at 9 of 9 roll calls at the Public Works Commission, roll call through Jul 23, 2026

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

PresentExcusedAbsentOldest first, 1 square per roll call

Absent 0. Dec 11, 2025 to Jul 23, 2026. The clerk’s record covers 11 of the 15 meetings we hold, through Jul 23, 2026.

Official roll call, from the clerk →
Meetings

Every meeting where we identified Woolford’s voice

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

  1. Sep 24, 2026Public Works Commission2.3 min19:11
  2. Jun 18, 2026Public Works Commission1.0 min50:47
  3. Apr 9, 2026Public Works CommissionBusiness and economic development2.6 min40:02
  4. Mar 12, 2026Public Works Commission0.3 min36:01
  5. Feb 26, 2026Public Works Commission0.7 min29:07
  6. Feb 12, 2026Public Works CommissionBudget and spending2.1 min6:50
  7. Jan 22, 2026Public Works CommissionBudget and spending0.7 min1:12:28
  8. Jan 8, 2026Public Works Commission2.2 min36:30
  9. Dec 11, 2025Public Works CommissionBudget and spending3.6 min11:53
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 Woolford was absent. Claude and Gemini each read every transcript with that day’s roster. A voice gets Paul Woolford’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 Woolford 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 Woolford or of San Francisco alone.