system works to remove it from believes. the primary purpose is to save firefighters lives. the firefighters as well as the people who make the inside of the building. but all of us pay insurance in addition buildings since 1989 the earthquake in san francisco we've been installing seismic systems that never get use but does that mean they're not going to be there? no. who asked those firefighters not to make those decisions if it saves one life >> may i ask a question have any of ice your unions taken a position. >> they have not. >> okay. next speaker.

>> hello, i'm john means. spur supports the placement of the fire code it allows an exception to the air reaccomplishment system. pursuant to section 511.2 subject buildings that are equipped with the elevator and with the building code section 3007 will no longer be required to install a system. this includes the fire commission that adopted the proposal earlier this year to choose within the elevator and using the air rescue system.

while it will provide a different means of delivering air the firefighters want a elevator. this amendment is consistent with the california state fire code which is not recognized for fire safety. such a elevator can rapid move the firefighters and air canisters up and down the building. the fire system can significantly increase the cost of the high-rise projects with an increase to firefighter safety. the only other mandatory jurisdiction other than san jose took the step to have either step consistent with the fire

code. we strongly ask you to adopt the san francisco fire code >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon supervisors. first, let me is i'm enjoying the day in our beautiful city. i'm a retired fire chef for second amendment. i was the fire marshall in phoenix during the late 90s and phoenix was under the process of developing a protein to type and we verified that the product is good for fir safety. they've accosted the air requirement from 2004 and currently in phoenix in the metro area 42 systems are

installed and more are planned. the fact that 24 buildings have installed that speaks well, for the safety of firefighters. firefighters love it. it's the only means of assuring that you're going to have air open the staging floor to replace air that has exhausted as firefighters fight fire. what's missing from the discussion today is the logistics in getting bottles shuffled by he elevator to the upper floors it that takes firefighters away from the firefight. i might add that the international fire code a large of the pressor of the fire code that has language today starred

out as an appendix a resolving document as more and more systems into into place their get further evaluated and i believe it will have the shelf language rather than the appendix >> i have a couple of questions. do you know the questioner to the question i asked before like how many cities and towns require this to be installed >> i don't but it's e valve the same as sprinkle letters were and it was mandated and the externals and the usefulness evolves you'll see more and more community using it.

essential the appendix will get >> other than phoenix what are some of the towns and cities that have mandated this? >> i don't have is list. >> another question and this is sort of an odd situation in some ways. would you agree with me that the reason for the air reaccomplishment is for the use for firefighters so they can continue to breathe and a yes, we're having a situation where we're dysphagia a debate whether to require a air reaccomplishment system to protect the firefighters but both the union and the commission are saying we don't need or want this. as you heard i'm not shy about

disagreeing with the fire department but it strikes me and i've tried to keep on a open mind about the issue is strikes me odd when our own fire department are saying for this air reaccomplishment system is to make sure we can continue to breathe we don't want or need it. it's an odd position to require it even though for your members you don't want or need it. it's an odd situation for us to be in >> my experience is as fire chief is a well-informed system and training in that resolves a lot of misgivings. the fire service is an odd fellow we resisted breathing

american people rays years ago now, it's common and no firefighter would go into a building await it. so the experience from phoenix is the firefighters understand the safety a of it they get into trouble they go to the stairwell and don't have to go down to a lower floor they can hook up and immediately reaccomplishment their bottle. there are other emergencies in the building that will allow the first responders to address the terrorism or firefighter rescue. so the system has a lot of nice things >> okay. thank you president chiu. >> thank you for being here i i

understand you're speaking on behalf of the keeping the sdauts go. i'm trying to understand again there's a a lot of interests on those questions but at the end of the day the firefighters and the managers have told you one thing and their self-interest would do what's the the interest of their rank and file but i want to ask you the same question. when we have been given a list of 15 organizations that support the state go and we've been given different information saying that only 1 of those organizations support the mandatory requirement what do you know about that that is >> i do not have copies of

letters submitted from those orchestras. the chief fire marshall indicated earlier there's a lot of decision will the appendix and a large number of committees were holding out they sthemd for the appendix in order to depreciate it into the document understanding that's the normal process to allow it to move from appendix to the language. it's clear as you suggested the case would be easy if this is really an absolute standard for fire fighting around the world >> i'm not sure of your question. there was other folks who thought it ought to be mandatory; right? >> as i said earlier there's an

awful lot of the fire code with the experience with the product code you'll find it move into the shelf language. >> thank you. next speaker week. >> hello supervisors thank you for your interesting questions. i miss this like a root canal. i support supervisor chu's and wiener's fire code. first of all, we learned that the experts is the fire commission the fire chief and high-rise committee recommended they support item in trouble 2. that's not to say this system is not good in any other locate it

but in san francisco the experts are saying this is what we want. what was left outs in the presentation earlier today is the folks in wheelchairs they're tough to get out of the building down a stairwell. across the country there's forces and against it but in san francisco your own experts are saying to you they will support item number 2. when the union backs it going against potential other people that's important to understand they're making a stand to support supervisor chu. don't confuse yourselves earlier today in the first place talking about psis. here's the information it used to be thirty minutes now they're

an hour. you're not in a fire for an hour it's pretty tough business and you're going to need to take a break. urging to go into down a floor or two. certainty units are designated to bring up bottles. and that in addition is another divide to keeping all our companies open because the process it there >> thank you. we read about in the chronicle today when you were the head of the firefighters union you sounded like you didn't support the change of the code now you do today can you tell us what's itself difference >> very good question.

first of all, noted enough emphasis was placed open the importance of the reinforced elevators. wee the week of new imply i'm sure the guys would have wanted reinforced elevators. now our airpacks to supervisor kim it looks like a than runer hits like hitting your 25th mile when you're in a fire your dragging. i said it's like you're in the martial arts. the - you're not going to do it on the fire floor it's like grand central station so you've got to get down a floor or two blood the fire change the bottle

and get back in the fight. that's been a major change. radios if you go do you think you have a button you push and an alarm goes off. the mechanisms have changed since that time on fighting firefighters or firefighter safety >> is that the sense among other firefighters and chiefs for us who are lay people here we're trying to figure out where the firefighters information. >> other froements have reduced their firefighter staff so they don't have the i read newspapers. in the a dividend and we can through bosses in the fire maybe

other locals need that because they've reduced their force and they don't have the people to throw into the fire. it's important to throw bodies at it. does that answer your question >> thank you. good afternoon. good afternoon obviously you have a lot of important topics on your plate i'd like to bring back to president wiener you talked about in the hearing you've shown great leadership particularly how do we make sure that the fire department does not impede our planning of things folks who are coming together in your neighborhoods

specifically trying to calm traffic and making our streets savor. i'm a homeowner on the block of bartlett street and it's single listing some of the problems we have here. i'm thrilled that the fire chief wife is here. this is not an isolate incident. we see time and time again that the incident on bartlett and the fire department is slowing down or there's a chilling effect where the fire department's don't bring forward a proposal. so to bring it back together i know we share personal safety i

want the firefighters to come to our neighborhood and work has been done to get their trucks through. and again on bartlett and streets throughout the city we need to make sure that the fire department as for the and didn't get in the way of our traffic safety improvement. it shouldn't dictate diligence from argue staff to know what we're doing >> thank you, ms. shafter. good afternoon >> good afternoon. i'm here to support supervisor wiener's position on bulb outs especially for seniors. there's an increasing number of seniors populating the city and we know that seniors are quite

vulnerable to accidents with vehicles. bib outs are important not only to the distance for the seniors who what can slower. but they also allow drivers to see seniors self-interest we are often told we have to make eye contact with the cars and gesture but seniors can't often do that. they don't want to fall so the tendency is to look down at the street and therefore more of the attention to pedestrians is being shifted not from the pedestrian itself but on the driver itself. putting out bulb outs will confer the vision of drivers

harassing as they approach the intersections and this is a proposal that's important for a city h that has a increase of seniors. and it's very, very good preventive health measure so i support it >> thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon supervisors i'm natalie on, on bailiff of our members we're here to spronl support supervisor wiener's bill so that this doesn't impede the process of the safety projects. while there's absolutely no argument rewarding the importance maintaining the fire

department vehicle access to protect and save lives we strongly recommend the ordinance because it takes a balanced approach. it specifically specifics say that this b will not precluded vehicle passage. and it will not - lastly, the ordinance has a committee where the designated representative can look at any restrictive vehicle access. san francisco is consistent ranked as incredibly dangerous to pedestrians and drivers. so to support the pedestrian goal to reduce our pedestrian fatalities do so by actually

cooperating. one-size-fits-all creates a clear barrier to the cities goal to save lives. so we're urging the city to set an example by approaching the ordinance as it currently reads. thank you >> thank you very much. is there any additional public comments? come forward >> good afternoon supervisors i'm doug. i'd like to thank supervisors chu and farrell for calling this hearing. i think the fire department is long overdue for a close examination. obviously long-term san franciscans remember the introvert for the misuse of alcohol at the fire stations and i think that issue has been two slowly dealt with at city hall.

since we're talking about the firefighter health and safety i want to say for the record and hopefully, the board will address those two items in later haerlgz about the fire code i'll read the headline. both articles are from the san francisco chronicle. the first thing is holland san francisco fir faces discipline for helmet cam but the next one is disturbing and, in fact, people don't know headline says tentative settlement law suit. i thought i was reading about somebody working in a southern

plantation i find it hard for firefighters to be working as a team if a certainty firefighter has been treated that way recently >> thank you. any additional public comment, please come up. >> supervisor wiener and kim and good afternoon. anthony. i want you to know i'm not asking you to support this system. there's a support for the international fire code on the consent calendar in october. what we'll have some conversation about the next statement but it's been vetted and supported by every firefighter fire department in the skroi.

you don't get into the fire code unless it's tavern and there's support for that particular code. the california state fire marshall voted to include the code. her vote as a positive we want to see is it if the code. the california fire chiefs association supported this with the california fire marshalls office. and the professional firefighters sported this as well. the question before this committee shouldn't be why we should have this. it's been answered. the question is shouldn't we insure that your fire code retains and adopt the appendix

k. that list of supporting documents is in the binder. i have binders here so you'll have all the supporting documents. i don't understand why the fire department's is not supporting this. make no mistake this is not an option but it will eliminate - >> thank you that was the expiration of your time. >> thank you. next speaker, please good afternoon. i'm a left hand fire protection engineer i've been involved for 20 years i've on the board of xrmz. i was also on the same committee that rubbing on was on about analyzing the high-rise task force for the state firefighter

marshall came together to try to bring the different varngsz or in the state into one spot and to come to agreement on the next code that's the code we're looking at now the state code with the industry community and firefighters to make sure that all the amendments line up with the satellite. i want to let you know that the fir reaccomplishment system never came up as an item that the state wanted to - the philadelphia fire was under the 1949 coincide it was not sprinkled and once it hit the sprinkle floor only 10

sprinkleers were necessary to put it out. and secondary water flying supply are the most effective tool to protect the fire department and personnel >> thank you very much is there any additional comments on item number one 2. yes. could you ask monthly who is able to stand please come forward >> thank you. i'm an attorney for rescue air. in my two minutes i want to say i'm sorry that you couldn't ask about the number of jurisdictions but that's 80. i want to talk about two issues. non-this is not an option. we ask the city attorney whether

or not this was truly an option and they said for any building above 1 hundred and 20 feet it's not on option their required to have the service elevator and they probably won't want this their say no option above 1 hundred and 20 feet and they're talking about replacing this with a fire access he elevator. are there any fire service elevators that need this code in this city right now by the way, we've heard testimony from someone who does this elevators they were for the other side and they said no zero, zip none. so the question is how can i is

we're to replace something with nothing how can you say that with small business owner something that's not been drilled or tested in the city. i wish you could have asked the fire chiefs their the experts. they can tell you when they're given a new thing to test they have to sdoi decide how it's compared and can you really get the air out. remember the one fallacy about the charter that the fire department put out is if it reaches every floor >> i have a question. >> could you just finish that one thing. >> could you ask you won question i said there are 80 jurisdictions. >> 80. >> that mandate this system. >> i believe so. we've asked for the list a