Processing audit and issues log

Audit summary and corrective actions applied:

1) Spelling/name inconsistencies: The transcript contains multiple spellings for some presenters (examples: "Wyatt Donnelly Landau" vs "Wyatt Donnelly Landolt"; "Chris Korgus" vs "Chris Corgus"; "Mike Reager" vs "Mike Ryker"). Action: final articles use consistent spellings chosen from the most frequent variants in the transcript (Wyatt Donnelly Landolt; Chris Korgus; Mike Reager) and flag the underlying discrepancy in the audit so reporters can verify official spellings in Board files.

2) Garbled numeric segments: Several segments in the transcript contained unintelligible or garbled numeric strings (for example, a passage listing gross square feet and other quantities). Action: where numbers in the transcript were clearly garbled or inconsistent, the articles avoid repeating unclear figures and instead use only numbers stated clearly (e.g., "over 1,600 units" and "at least 470 on-site affordable units" for Pier 70). Where docketed not-to-exceed bond totals were read aloud in the transcript, the article cites them as docket figures and flags them for cross-check with the official Board packet.

3) Vote/tally clarity: Committee recommendations were advanced "without objection" in the transcript; no roll-call tallies were recorded. Action: articles report advancement by unanimous consent/no objection and note the absence of recorded roll-call tallies; follow-up reporting should use official minutes or clerk records for vote details.

4) Attribution and quotation lock: All direct quotes in the articles are sourced to speakers who appear in the meeting transcript and are listed in each article's speaker whitelist. No speaker names have been inferred beyond those provided in the transcript.