Transcripts For SFGTV Government Access Programming 20240714

They maintain the system. System improvements and expansion belong to p. U. C. We are working with them to make sure it meets the needs of the department. I have a map the way it was in 2010 prior to any bonds that have passed. This is the way it was. You have the three tanks, johns, as bury and twin peaks. Two bump stations that pump one is at headquarters and the other at vanness in case they are introduced for saltwater. This happened in 1989. That was pump station number two that was pressure rised to the system. The growth of the city back in the day in 1906 was downtown. At the time there was no systems that were expended to that. After that and we will talk about since 2010, we have been working to implement projects to improve this system. Finally needed to address the system it has been used. In 2010, they allocated 102 million projects. In 2014, it was 54 million. It is proposed 2020 to be 53. 5 million allocated if passed to the system. What have we done since 2010 on the projects . 30 new systems installed. 15 in sunset and richmond. Those are prior to the installation of the systems. The current map will include those new systems. They u upgraded three primary reservoirs, replaced Diesel Engine and pump station one and they improved some tunnel projects. Ones under construction now 19th avenue pipeline, as bury bypass. If you drive through you will see they are putting that into the system. Sea water pump station two is working with projects now and the pipeline is also being upgraded. Some of th the things they are working on. When we have new projects to develop in the city, the Development Project installed within their boundaries. We negotiate with them outside how we can tie into the system. Thathat is how the project is working now and the pipeline. They will work on that to connect the system within the boundaries. The city has developers to develop that and pay for that. Future project development. We will Work Together to compile a list of potential projects to be analyzed. Pilot projects to the not so allocated areas in the city. The scope is city wide with focus on areas with limited access to the system. That is what the future brings. If we go to the recommendation from the grand jury. By no later than december 31st of 2020, the office of capitol plumbing should present the detailed plan to ensure the city is well prepared to fight fires in the event of a 1906 earthquake 7. 8. We want to ensure we have the infrastructure and resources to fight fires. It is something that would be a focus of the next 10 year capital plan. The request presentation will be delivered to the plan across San Francisco and the challenges. The city will sing with a plan and push back the plan to december 31st, 2021. Number two. Upon discussing Condition One could include detailed proposal including finance and sources for the installation within 15 years of High Pressure seismically safe water system for those parts of the city that dont have one no later than june 30, 2034. The commitment for the specific uses on specific timelines for San Francisco Public Infrastructure is the work of a 10 year capital plan. It has longstanding principals to guide the investments in the projects. In the next 10 year plan and those that follow the city will continue to analyze the programs identify the source goes to advance those priorities. By no later than june 30, 2021, the city should purchase 20 new pws being requested to replace and expand the inadequate inventory. Response is that the Fire Department has been allocated funds in fiscal year 1920 to purchase five. The department will work to develop the multiyear contract this way. The procurement of funding available to expedite the process. Funding for Additional Units will be weighed and prioritized with other budget requests. Recommendation 5. Sffd should have areas present low pressure hydrants o or cisterns. They will go out to bid through the procurement before construction. These are heavier duty to be deployed and moved through out the city depending on the need giving the Operational Flexibility in the response. Recommendation number 6. Sfd should study adding water pump stations to improve the water sources especially on the west side. Findings and recommendations should be presented by no later than june 30, 2021. The response from the commission. It is going to be they will complete this study by june 30, 2021. Grand jury condition nine. No later than december 31, 2020, p. U. C. Subject to approval should implement best practices for the maintenance of the assets and b define with the valves in the system are critical and therefore require more attention and priority in the maintenance plans. Your response. This recommendation has already been implemented. It is in collaboration and consistent with the terms of the understanding regarding operation of water supply system. They will seek sfd written approval for any modification that could compromise the function as to High Pressure. Everything is with our approval. Grand jury recommendation 10. By no later than june 2020 it should be amended to include a detailed road map for exercises including earthquake drills involving the so a wss. Fire department conducts the weekly tests throughout the city. They will work to have in attendance and participate in the drills. They will commit to working to enhance the scope and frequency of training in the future for improved cooperation. They will Work Together to amends the m. O. U. By june 30, 2020. That concludes the commissions presentation of the civil grand jury recommendations and responses. Any questions . Chief, at this particular point we ask for Public Comment. Any member of the public wishes to give Public Comment on this item, please approach the podium. We will have three minutes for your Public Comment. Good mortgages r morning, commissioners, i am retired deputy chief of the San Francisco Fire Department. We are cognizant this is 9 11. We are presently at a historic juncture in the history of the city and you are in the spotlight, commissioners. This is the point in San Francisco history at which the future survival of the city will be decided. Based on how seriously you take the civil grand jury report. This report makes two facts abundantly clear if San Francisco is to survivor the fires the accident water supply must be expanded and time is of the essence. You take this seriously and if you understand the gravity of the situation, then there are no means you can avoid the responsibility of exercising the leadership role your position demands of you. Sadly, if this is left to the p. U. C. , the 15 neighborhoods will never have the protection of viable awss as evidenced by the absurdities put forth over the last three years. In promoting Drinking Water endorsed by the Previous Administration the p. U. C. Formulated recipe for the destruction of the city by fire immediately following the earthquake. The complete expansion will require approximately doubling the area currently protected and doubling pumping capacity only accomplished by unlimited supply of nonpottable water from the te diversified stations. They yield to the p. U. C. Withinsis tens on the use with the insistence of the Drinking Water. The expansion will not take place. The awss must expand to all city neighborhoods and done before the next great earthquake strikes has been known for decades. This is a matter of public record. No city agency took responsibility for the reality based plan. You are the members of the San Francisco Fire Commission. If not you who will do this . If not now when will this be done. I have a packet of information with the chief and also for deputy chief. Have you concluded your remarks . Yes, i have. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please identify. I am duck morton. It is nearly 30 years since the 6. 9 earthquake. Actions taken today still leaves huge parts of the city open to catastrophic fire. Usgs considers the last few decades to be an earthquake route. The 2008 haywired earthquake scenario anticipates within 30 years a 7. 0 earthquake on the hayward fault and forecasts inadequate water supply for firefighting. City engineers plan at least 100 simultaneous fires following a 7. 8 earthquake. That means 30 times strong thanloma. It means thousands of deaths, injuries, loss of housing and commercial viability. Property damage at 8 billion plus dollars, higher if no city wide awss. 15 neighborhoods that are nonawss. Western and southern, not just west side, the southern neighborhoods. Bayview out in those districts with over about 400,000 residents, 140,000 people i mean housing there. Those neighborhoods could be ashes in a day. Remember santa rosa. It is time to correct decades of official missed opportunities, ballot and policy misrepresentations inadequate schemes including drinks water for firefighting. The result dangerous and costly delays. In providing awss city wide. 2003. This Commission Said as soon as possible. Great. Awss city wide that was from the grand jury report 2003. In 2009 no action. 2010 mayor no action, same thing. We have had bond measures but for the existing system, no viable extensions in 30 years. Fire commissioners that means you. You are responsible for protecting the city, for protecting it from fire so please dont be passive as Fire Commissions have been in 30 years. Lastly, you could take immediate action to ask for the portable water supply. Get them out in our neighborhoods now. Your time is up. Next speaker. Your time is up, sir. Next speaker, please. Good morning, commissioners, i am duck allen. I have lived in district 7 for 34 years. I am here to strongly recommend you quickly organize by the end of september a Permanent Task force to implement the 10 recommendations and the required responses by the civil grand jury report. When are you going to announce the names of the Task Force Members and who will be in charge of the task force. What will be the consequences if the task force does not meet the timeline due dates . I do not agree with the long timeline target date suggested by the grand jury under recommendation number two because back in 2003, 16 years ago, a grand jury first recommended that a High Pressure auxiliary water supply system be extended to serve all parts of the city. Technically, you already have invested 16 years to construct this water system. One point of caution. Having worked with the p. U. C. To help henry store lake merced five of us filed a lawsuit. The state said file a petition and they will treat it like a lawsuit. The state said to us five guys includes mr. Morton, we will treat it like a lawsuit but it wont cost you the money and wont take as long. When i started rowing it was 26 to 27 feet high in lake merced. When we made there it was down to 11 feet. Then they went into now when the state intervened we have a conjunctive use program. Because of the five guys. That is why we have lake merced as it is today. It is a water source up to run 16, 18 feet. Because you are going to have an m. O. U. With a p. U. C. Whom i dont trust, we will be tracking your progress and we will be ready to help you and we will appear before the p. U. C. And to inspire them to followthrough and that will allow any more delays. Thank you for your time this morning commissioners. Next speaker, please. Eileen, coalition for San Francisco neighborhoods here on my own behalf. I am urging the Fire Commission to accept the findings and recommendations of the civil grand jury regarding the emergency firefighting water system. I am also urging the fire Admission Commission commission to make the decision independent. Yesterday the sf p. U. C. Decision was based on staff responses to the city civil grand jury report. During the staff presentation, the Fire Department and Public Works Department were mentioned repeatedly. This seemed to suggest the sf p. U. C. Was speaking for these departments as well. During the staff presentation, the staff responses focused on two things, certain civil grand jury recommendations were being implemented and other recommendations were beyond the control of the sf p. U. C. As they were linked to the 10 year capital plan. I have been attending the meetings three years. I would challenge the Fire Department and the sf p. U. Cp as version about the plan. There were major revisions to the 10 year plan based on directives from the mayor. This also included the timing of when the easter 2020 bond would be placed on the balloted. That has been moved to the marc. The Capital Planning Committee Staff has subsequently advised the budget and legislative analysts the ballot language will contain no specific projects relating to the emergency firefighting water system because these projects are still under secret review. As the 2020 bond language will lack specificity regarding efws projects now is the time for the Fire Department and commission to add an independent voice. I am urging the Fire Commission to determine that the findings and recommendations be incorporated into the implementation, assuming voter approval of the bond. Thank you. Next speaker, please. I am a concerned citizen and resident and maytive of San Francisco. Since i lived here my whole life, 63 years, i have seen tremendous amounts of buildings going on in my district. I assumed the city had enough responsibility to have protection for all of the New Buildings going up. That is fire material. When that goes, everything goes. When you go from one house one level to four or five story building, how is that covered . Has anybody ever addressed the fact you are issuing Building Permits . You dont have adequate protection for any of the residents in those neighborhoods. It is also my understanding there was a proposed budget in, i believe, 2006 was going to be around 310 million bond to put in a better system to protect the sun set in the richmond district. That got delayed and went up to 610 million. When the question was asked why has it gone up so high . Government fees to pay, government salaries, everything. I would like this board to consider maybe looking at getting proposals from private industry managing the fire system in the city. Managing putting in the pipes and monitoring these so we are not burdened with heavy taxes more so than now. I cant believe the Fire Department would say we dont want this because i know they do. I would like to know and i dont have to get the answer now maybe you dont have it. Who is holding this up . What parties are holding this up . The neighborhoods want it. I believe from what i just heard from the Fire Department they wouldnt say no to it. Who is saying no . To putting adequate protection in the neighborhoods . Can you answer me do i go to somebody to find that out . Any meetings held, why somebody would not want to do this . I am talking about what i heard something about 2030. That is a long time. Nobody can tell me where to go . No. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good morning. I am john. I am currently a resident on rivera street between 39 and 40th avenue in the sun set. I have a degree in Fire Protection, also about 12 Years Experience with municipal, state and federal fir firefighting agencies. I know how important it is for having adequate Water Supplies and fighting any major fires. I also know from personal experience and from what i have heard throughout the state that San Francisco Fire Department has a very good reputation. They are a great Fire Department. They deserve all of the support they can get. When i hear that the civil grand jury has a number of findings and recommendations to improve the water system and then noticing that my own district has certain lack of water supply infrastructure, i just want to lend my support to the voices calling for following the grand jurys report and implementing it. I thank you for all of your efforts. Thank you very much, sir. Next speaker, please. In good morning, commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity. I am the author of the novel 1906 which is a minute by minute recreation what happened to us on april 18, 1906. I am also the documentary film maker and studdrying this for 30 years. We have at a crucial juncture. I read the report and read your response in detail. There are two things that jump out at me. First, the recommendation that we immediately build an aggressive portable water supply system. History i have a quote that i would like to use that if history teaches us anything, it is the fact that history rarely teaches us anything. In 1906 what was left of the city was saved by a portable water supply system known as United States navy. Five ships docked on the embarcadero at 5 00 on april 19, 1906 everything for the next 36 hours they pumped 80 milliongallons of saltwater. They ran a hose line up vanness to stop the fire from spreading. They saved the water front crucial to the rebuilding of San Francisco. In 1989, october 11, the San Francisco Fire Department deployed and tested the first time a portable water supply system that saved the city again because they had not stopped the fire in the marina we might not be having this conversation. One of the strongest recommendations you folks responded to and i commend you for that was to acknowledge the value of that system. I believe it was in 2011 the chief recommended 40 containers, metal with a portable water supply system. This is the cheapest most flexible, most eflecttive water supply system any city could have. No other system i dont care how much you strengthen it is invulnerable to the movement of the ground. I must tell you, i take great um bridge that we can comingle the breakish water from make merced or saltwater where Drinking Water by building a pumping station at sunset. Redont own that water, twothirds belongs to people in south bay. Second, what are we going to do . 400,000 people you cant drink the water while we fight the fires . We need saltwater pumping stations. It is the only supply. In 1906 there were 578 firefighters on duty in the stations. Now there are 350. The city has tripled our response capability has gone down. We have not given them the tools they need to win this fight. It is going to happen on your watch. Thank you very much. Any member of the public to comment at this time, please approach the podium. Thank you very much. Good morning. I am nancy. Today should be a joyous day for the Fire Commission because the civil grand jury has given you an opportunity to lead this great Fire Department to ones again save San Francisco from burning after the next big earthquake. This provides supporting evidence for a detailed plan and steps to achieve your goal of suppressing post earthquake fires by expanding the original using the nonpottable water. You can vote to accept the civil grand juries findings and recommendations you can approve the report. You do not have to approve draft responses which serve to perpetuate the status quo of delaying ensuring maximum Fire Protection. I am insulted no commitment to funding may be made before considering tradeoffsness. Tradeoffs . We are talking about planning to save the city from earthquake fires especially the unprotected west side where the fires will go to 19th avenue and beyond. We need crisis mode planning. We know what happened in 1906. We have a way to prevent it. Jury states urgency to getting prepared now for the earthquake. This is your mandate for action to allow you to ask the mayor to set aside the procedures de flying the fire defendant the resources to expand the infrastructure and unlimited water to protect every part of the city. Your needs are not just nicety to wait for your turnin line. Your job is to save lives and property. That puts Fire Department needs and jurys recommendations as top priority for the city. Without change you are gambling our lives hoping the earthquake will not happen. The mayor got 1 billion in june from the state and decided where to go not respecting the 10 year capital plan. If the mayor can change the rules of the game for her agenda, then you can ask her to immediately prioritize protecting all of San Francisco with the awss system now. This commission today has the power to tell the mayor what you must have to do your job. You do not stand up for defending your mission, who will. Thank you for considering my comments. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please. Good morning. I am russ sturgis. I am a member of the 20182019 civil grand jury. I am glad to see you are paying a lot of attention to our report. I am here mainly out of selfinterest. I volunteered for the jury because i live on 39th avenue and in the event of the next earthquake we have no Fire Protection. If it knocked out the municipal water system, which is expected. That is why i volunteered for the grand jury, and that is why i am urging you to take our report extremely seriously and see that our Fire Department has what they need in the way of water where they need it and when they need it. Thank you. Does thank you very much. Any other member of the public that wishes to give Public Comment at this time . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Colleagues. Any questions and comments in terms of this particular recommendation to adopt our response . Commissioner veronese. Commissioner veronese chief, i dont know when you walked back in from the meeting. You were meeting with the mayors office. If you caught some of the Public Comment tonight. Can you comment on some of the challenges that the department is facing and reassure the public this is a concern of ours that we are taking seriously. I know if your last budget we ask for 20 hose tenders and we got five hose tenders. I think, frankly speaking, the biggest downfall for the members of the public, the biggest downfall with the San Francisco Fire Department is our ability to adapt and to get the job done in any case of an emergency. Now, i know everybody looks at us as though we do a very good job and we do a very good job. That is because we adapt. It is not because we necessarily have the best technology. It is a 100 testament to the staff and the experience they have. That being said when you look at the pictures what happened up in santa rosa with the neighborhoods devastated, the 1906 earthquake is unfortunately too far of a memory for the city and the people making the decisions on funding. When they they dont see the sun set as that happening, unfortunately, and we all know that it is a very real possibility. I think the focus has been since we know that the waterlines will likely break in an earthquake, and we have seen by way of example at the fire on gary and i believe it was sixth avenue that nearly 25 of our entire department on staff at that point was on the scene. That was one fire. That being said, if there was a major earthquake there will likely be fires in most parts of the city and we would find the resources as they did in 1906 to fight whatever fire does exist. That being said, funding has always been our major problem and it continues to be our major problem, and we get the resources that we need on a piece meal basis because the 1906 earthquake has happened more than 100 years ago. It is not fresh in peoples minds. If i could hand this off to you and make comment. I know the grand jury report is not news to anybody here. Frankly i am not surprised. It is a priority of ours, i am convinced awss is the solution since anything under ground is historically as mentioned not utilized in major fires but mostly the above Ground Resources have been. Chief, can i give this to you for a quick comment . Certainly. Thank you commissioner. I want to thank all of the public for their comments today. We do take them seriously. What i can say is that we are and have been actively working on a stateoftheart design for the five hose tenders that we are given funding for. They will have fourwheel drive, 6,000 feet of hose, able to pump, we are actively working on that. As you have said funding is often times an issue, and there is bond money proposed in the upcoming 2020 bond for more emergency firefighting water supply system and build out of that so we are taking steps and we are moving forward with those things, but we cant make things happen overnight, but we certainly are moving in the right direction. We have also been working not with just the p. U. C. But step for step with supervisor fewer on this and several other supervisors. I know that we do run scenarios of 1906 level earthquakes if they are just on paper. If perhaps we could get update what those look like and how prepared really the department is to meet those needs that we anticipate from the 1906 level earthquake. Absolutely. Thank you very much, Vice President covington. Commissioner covington thank you, mr. President. I want to thank my fellow citizens for coming out speaking directly to us. We have had communications from several of you in the past, and we appreciate that. As to the question regarding how best to perhaps proceed, the department along with the Commission Submits a budget, a budget that has to be approved by the board of supervisors super and the mayors office. We have been asked to reduce our spending instead of increasing our spending. I know that this is of paramount interest to you, having the hose tenders and other things at thee red de. You need to talk to your supervisors. We go and talk to them and we true to well, all of the commissioners this past budget cycle went and talked to the supervisors and outlined our needs and gave information to the supervisors supporting our needs and we need your voice to be heard with them because they vote on the budget. We do not vote on the budget. We can only share with them what our needs are, present our plans and then what we get back over the years is please reduce your budget by 3 . I just want to have you know that what is in your heart to do is also in our heart to do in this regard. We are not at odds by any means on that. You will not get any push back from us about your concerns. We will not try to allay your fears or i wont try to allay your fears by saying you worry too much because i worry, too. I just wanted you to know that. President nakajo thank you very much, Vice President covington. At this particular point, commissioners this item is up for adoption in terms of adopting and approving the recommendations by this commission. In terms of the recommendations by the civic grand jury. The recommendations are one, two, four, five six, nine and 10. I i want to thank chief ellis and staff in terms of the presentations of that. Also, i want to echo the same comments from all of the commissioners of the public. Thank you so much for your attendance, but also for your comments and your comments are taken seriously. In terms of what the take away is that we all have a lot of work to do, but we need to have a starting point in terms of this particular commission with this recommendation that is put out by the civic grand jury in terms of combined efforts of education an and advocacy. I think we have been there on every level. It comes down to a joint working together effort between our department, p. U. C. , mayor, board oboardof supervisors per, and te education for the city and county of San Francisco. At this point, commissioners is there a motion to adopt at this particular item . I move that the recommendation the response to the recommendation be approved as submitted. Thank you very much, Vice President covington. Commissioners we have a motion. We need a second. Second. Thank you commissioner hardeman. Did i take Public Comment. I did on this item. All in favor of the adoption of the recommendations say aye. Any denies no. Thank you very much. It nonly passes. Item 5 amendments to the fire code. Discussion and possible action to recommend the board of supervisors approve a proposed ordinance inequitying 2019 amendments to the fire code consistent recurring on a three year cycle. It so would repeal the existing 2016 San Francisco fire code and adopt the 2019 california fire code and 2018 International Fire code together with San Francisco specific amendments. Thank you very much, madam secretary. I know the chief is going to make this presentation. In your dockets the proposed ordinance is charted of findings supporting the San Francisco specific amendments to the california fire code, International Fire code and the chief will explain and narrate all of this. Chief. Welcome. Thank you. Good morning, commissioners. Fire marshal. It is my goal today i believe you have received a copy of our proposed amendments for your review. I direct you to focus on the legislative digest that provides a summary of the contents of the fire code. The fire code proposed 2019 is a carryover of the 2016 with modifications to it. The code itself is roughly 70 pages long. The modifications on two or three pages long. It is relatively minor modification to it. Chief are you talking about exhibit a standard findings for the San Francisco Fire Commission. Is this the document . Three parts. Legislative digest which you should have. That document walkings everyone through the modifications presented here today. Go ahead, please kin. I would like to touch on a couple things. Generally about the process in general terms and the internal process what we have done to get to today. Then i would like to have the captain come up and give a short overview of the modification. Then i would take any and all questions. As i begin i would like to acknowledge a couple people. I is have asked the captain to join us today. He was designated the lead member to put this document together. We opened up suggestions and for all of our officers to put forward recommendations for any changes. We gathered that information. Captain coughlin put that together. We had numerous meetings and sifted through it to what we have here before you. We will highlight those as we go on. Briefly, as far as the process, the fire code of california adopts a new fire code every three years. The current is 2016 expires at the end of the fiscal year. In sacramento they take into consideration the International Fire code, takes a look at that, adopts specific sections for the state of california and adds california amendments. With that becomes known as the california fire code. This was adopted by the Building Commission and published in july of this year. Once it is published, a local authority, which for us is San Francisco for the city and county of San Francisco, we have six months to add our amendments to that code. That code will go into effect in 2019 fire code will become the 2019 San Francisco fire code in january of 2020. As the local authority we can add, be more restrictive, not less restrictive. We can address unique challenges to our local jurisdiction based on topography, geology, climate and density is part of that. That is the basis of putting forward these amendments. As i mentioned captain coughlin was appointed to lead. We took in suggestions from members and produced a draft document and brought the senior team of Fire Prevention together, we went through the draft, cleaned it up, put forward recommendation to the chief of the department. Met with the chief of the department and so our final proposed draft was then forwarded to the City Attorneys office. I would like to acknowledge Sarah Crowley who cleaned up the language. That is the document before you today. By law, the chief of the department is required to submit amendments through this body, the Fire Commission to the board of supervisors for approval. That is what we are doing today. As i mentioned in general, the bulk of all of this, the majority is carried from 2016 with some modifications. I would like to note the administrative bul bulletins are part of the fire code but a separate parallel path in the next month we expect to bring those forward to you. Those bulletins, the path those take are to this commission. They do not go to the board of supervisors. Since this is time constraint associated with the fire code amendments, we thought it would be easier to separate it out and have parallel paths. At this time i would like to bring captain coughlin up to point out and highlight the modifications to our fire code. Thank you very much, chief. Good morning, commissioners. The captain has been working on this fire code for the last few months and also in 2016. As fire marshal mentioned. This is a repeal of the 2016 and then the 2019 code coming in. When you see the legislative digest you can compare it. Most of it hasnt changed in the last code cycle. Iit is additions or deletions that we are adding to it. It is more clarifications this code cycle than last time. The legislative digest worked with the City Attorney crowley to put this nice summary for you. I will go through highlights. If you have any questions, let me know. As you can start at the bottom of page one regarding section 106, previously all fees lived in section 113 of the International Fire code and california fire code moved them to 106. We were forced to adjust them. The fees which originally stated 113 are now 106. Nothing changed. I transferred that code language over. Since we have the administrative hearing that is the violations when they dont complete the violations, we cleaned up the language. If the penalties are a misdemeanor or infraction. That is how we can use the City Attorney to help us abate those violations and process with the assessors office. To abate versus taking to court that cleans up the language in there. The next portion talks about each step of the process. We found out the process came in during the last code cycle and trying to recoup fees for possessing of transferring from district inspectors to our Complaint Team who is out there to get to the administrative part of it to filing it, and we assigned fees to it. We placed that in our code. It was in there previously. What happens to the fees . We take those fees and keep it for Community Outreach and Fire Prevention, inspector training to hopefully lessen the violations coming in and go to the administrative hearing process. Farther down it talks about the california government code. That states restatement of the california code voted on in 2017. They upped the fees and placed in our code. Section 508. That was brought to us by our Fire Protection engineers who mentioned the fcc room at the command center in the high raise has a one hour rating. As you are in the high rise it is rated as an hour. All of the shafts and fire alarms are two hours. We saw inconsistency between the two and couldnt understand. We upped the rating of the walls to be consistent with everything in the room up to and including watertight protection. If there is an incident above the water doesnt come down there and ruin the fire alarm system. Section 903 and 907. That is to clarify what the qualifications are for a person working on a fire alarm system or sprinkler system. Currently it leaves it up to the authority having jurisdiction, ourselves to declare what those are. It was never in the code what those qualifications are. We adopted the states code which is having the contractor state licensing board certifications c16 or c 10. We wanted to spell it out so there is no ambiguity. These are the qualifications you need. It is who you go to to get the work done. Farther down in section 1031 and 1104 specifies inspections for fire escapes. It lived in the housing code only. Who uses the fire escapes more than anybody else . The Fire Department. We are ensuring it is in the code if there is an issue we can issue a violation. Make sure it is certified every five years. That is page 3 section 1104. All fire escapes be examined every fire years. This talks about helps clarify the language regarding the sounding of fire alarms when it comes to relocations in high rise buildings and nonrelocation buildings. It is a tone versus a three pulse. Other than that Everything Else is repeat of 2016 in the code. That is all they are. Are there any questions . Thank you very much. I will have you stay up there depending upon the commissioners and their questions. Chief anything else in the presentation before we open up to the public and the commissioners . No, i think we hit the highlights and the information is there for your hopeful review and approval. President nakajo you are looking for adoption of this today . Correct. If you want to give Public Comment, please approach. Public comment is closed. I see Vice President covingtons name on the roster. Commissioner covington am i to understand that this will come to us again i in 2022. Every three years. Commissioner covington thank you fire marshal and captain hoffman for doing all of this work. We have four documents for a total of 88 page pages for read. I move that we accept the code amendments and the update as given to us by our fire marshal. Thank you very much. Commissioners the Vice President has made a motion but we still want twant towant to enenterta. I will second it. Thank you very much. Commissioner you have a question or comment be . Quick question. This passing this today does not prejudice us to amended at any point . I think i read that in there, is that right . Thats correct. I would like the department to explore the ability to charge hospitals fees for ambulances that wait after a certain amount of time. We can explore that and add that to this code. That is what i am hearing. I dont think that would live in the fire code. That would live somewhere else. We will figure out where it lives. Can we do anything midstream . Absolutely. I second passing it. Commissioner hardeman. Commissioner hardeman while you are up there, chief, i want to comment you on your report which was overlooked during the presentation. [please stand by] any idea how many there are . I dont have an idea, but what i do know, there is about 35,000 in the city. How many of them have a fire escape, i do not know. But the current review of those fire escapes, or inspection of those fire escapes by the housing inspection, it only addresses one or two. Those are overlooked as well. Thats why we went to get it into the code. The owner shall be able to provide a fiveyear certification that within the last five years that fire escape has been inspected and signed off on. The allclear given. Commissioner hardeman one of the reasons i brought that up,