the voters of the city and county of san francisco opposite -- adopted proposition a which consolidated m.t.a. in the department of parking and traffic. within the text of that, was a provision that allowed the board of supervisors to enact an ordinance that would give it review over sfmta decisions regarding various curb space decisions, bicycle lanes, traffic mitigation measures, et cetera. earlier this year over a decade after the past prop eight, they cosponsored an ordinance to enact that review provision. in doing so, they expressly exempted certain projects from review that were determined to be unequivocally in the public interest. under that existing law, the board of supervisors can review a variety of curved management decisions but it would not be allowed to review the implementation of it really public projects like bike lanes,

curb modifications for street sweeping or best traffic transit projects. the latter category of which is before this committee today. and the reason we are discussing if ert today is two fold. there is no definition of bus rapid transit in the code which provides guidance as to the scope of the board's review authority of these projects. second, is a matter of public policy, the proposed amendment would qualify this board's desire to promote ert projects that are genuinely designed and implemented to further public transportation and to improve public transportation reliability or other vehicles. i have circulated an amendment to the members of this committee i have a few additional copies here which would clarify the policy preference and make sure that the board would not be able to review the projects that are designed for public transportation use but that would allow the board to take

review of bart projects to the extent that they are designed for use by private commercial shuttles, tour buses and other modes of transportation that may impede the flow of public transportation. the proposed amendment is on page 2, line four and replaces the words bus rapid transit project with bus rapid transit project that includes transit only areas or in lanes for municipal railway vehicles, taxis, authorized emergency vehicles and/or golden gate transit vehicles. with that, i'm happy to answer questions but i will conclude my opening comments and i want to thank sfmta for their collaboration on this language. with respectfully requesting the amendment to be made in the file be forwarded to consideration by the full board of supervisors. >> can you -- i'm sorry. can you repeat what you said? >> the amendment before us today

would qualify the exemption for bus rapid transit lanes to make sure the board is not taking review of bart projects that are improving public transportation reliability and improving public transportation but it would allow the board to take review of bus rapid transit projects that are designed and permit private transit usage. >> this is an amendment to the legislation? the ordinance that supervisor peskin and i added so we have review over decisions that are embedded in the charter? >> we add this option. >> now you are amending it in with a limited scope as it relates to private transit vehicles? >> that is correct. >> you talked to my office, right? >> i did. >> i wanted to put that on the records. >> thank you, very much. >> thank you, very much. with that, we will go to public comment on item six.

i have a couple of comment cards everyone who submitted, come on up. i only have four here. any members of the public? ok. paul, kyle, latricia, nema. come on up. >> adjectives actually it is filled. my mistake. i. i am here today representing the hundreds of people who drive for several private commuter services in the program. it is in the best interest of our drivers and passengers that transit only lanes continue to allow large capacity vehicles that are regulated by the m.t.a. our drivers are highly trained and can manage the traffic of

buses and are trained to give deference to munimobile. these companies are regulated by the m.t.a. for example. they pay a permit to be of established programs which should allow them to use the lanes and continue to move forward towards the same goals. faster service of these vehicles will continue to encourage people out of the single occupancy vehicles and all the benefits that come with that. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. my name is kyle. i am here with transit inc. we are the first and only permitted private transit vehicle operator in the city of san francisco. as a part of that permit, we do have to provide drivers with training including training into -- to give deference to

munimobile operators. we have a direct line of communication with the sfmta. any kind of operational concerns that you may have, we are in close communication with them. i would like to say that i do think it would be good to give consideration to those companies and entities that are permitted when considering lane usage for these transit only or bus only lanes. thank you. >> hello. i am here today representing 665 teamsters who drive for several private commuters. it is in our best interest that they continued to allow the is capacity vehicles that are regulated by the m.t.a. our drivers are highly trained and can manage the traffic and buses.

there is an established program which allows them to use these lanes. faster services of these vehicles will continue to encourage people out of single occupancy vehicles. we run an affordable company. we pick up and drop off passengers from designated stops using a transit only lane is and will be beneficial for the passengers and the company. the drivers are all well trained and the drivers are proud teamsters. it is safer for vehicles to share these neat -- lanes with other buses. thank you.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. i am here on behalf of cherry transit inc. this is an important conversation. we appreciate the supervisors having this conversation. currently there are two types in the lanes. they allow both buses and taxis to operate on them. because our vehicles are of the size and capacity that they are, they are defined as buses by the state. they therefore have access to bus and taxi lanes. i'm here to say that chariot will stay committed to complementing public transit. based on the permit that we have with sfmta, the criteria that we are abiding by that requires this to complement public transit and not compete with it. we do share our data in realtime and this is important for this conversation. we can work with m.t.a. to determine whether our vehicles

are getting in the way of public transit and we have moved several of our routes and stops in order to make sure that we are truly complementing and not competing. moreover, we are still committed to taking single occupancy vehicles off the road for every chariot. we are committed to our partnership with the teamsters and committed to investing in drivers. half of whom are san francisco residents. thank you for your time. >> any other members of the public who wish to comment on public six? public comment is closed. all right. colleagues, can we get a motion on this item? item six. ok. we will make a motion to send this to the full board with positive recommendation. i'm sorry. you have your amendment? >> we would make a motion to accept the amendment.

do you have an additional amendment? >> thank you, very much. >> except the amendment as proposed by supervisor peskin's his office. >> can we do that without objection? ok. all right. on the underlying item, as amended, to the full board with a positive recommendation. we will do that without objection. all right. thank you, everyone. told on. next item, item seven. >> item 7-11. >> 7-11. >> item seven is an ordinance amending the general plan by adding the central south of market or central soma area plan making conforming amendments and making appropriate findings. item number 8 isn't ordinance amending the zoning map to create a central south of market special use district. and make other amendments that are making appropriate findings. item number 10 -- item number 9 is an ordinance amending that

business and tax regulations to create the central south of market housing sustainability district to provide a streamlined and ministerial approval process for certain housing projects within the districts. creating a board of appeals process for appeals or projects within the district and making appropriate findings. item ten is an ordinance amending the administrative and planning codes to give effect to the central south of market area plan and making appropriate findings. item number 11 isn't ordinance amending the tax financing law to allow it with facilities and services for the central south of market plan and make other necessary amendments. >> thank you. i will turn it over to supervisor kim. >> thank you. i really want to appreciate the land use committee's patients as they traverse through the central soma plan with me over the next -- over the last three months. i really hope that we will be able to pass the plan out of

committee today with recommendation to the full board i only have one final set of amendments to make in regards to the old mint and increasing their c.f.d. revenues to $20 million. thank you for the additional time. this did force the california historical society and community groups to come together and there was a level of agreement which was codified in the amendments that i am presenting here today in regards to the increase of the $20 million and linking it to a provision of below market rate space -- community serving spaces that may be at least at below market rates to organizations associated with cultural districts established under chapter 107 of the administrative code. the 20 million should be allocated to the restoration of the old mint and 155 million

should be allocated to regional transportation capacity enhancement expansions. this one amendment does require a number of amendments to be implemented in the document that we have articulated. i am sorry. and then there were a number of -- six and seven are different amendments that we are making to reflect the prior amendments made to the funding. >> i'm sorry. can you repeat that? >> number 1 is a new. what did you say? it was confusing. >> amendments two, three and four and five are amendments that need to be made to the implementation document to reflect the change that we are making. >> these are all related to number 1? >> yes. my apologies. six and seven are different. item six is to -- edits to the

implementation document to reflect prior amendments made to the planning code administrative code which reduces funding for enhanced stormwater management in complete streets by $4 million and water recycling stormwater management and public spaces by $1 million. the final is another conforming edits based on another prior amendment made at the land use committee to reflect the amendments to the central soma c.f.d. six and seven are technical cleanup amendments to reflect previous amendments that have already been adopted by this committee. and those are my final amendments that i will be introducing to land use committee today. i do really have to think lisa and josh. along with our city attorney attorney. both peter and victoria for working so closely with our office over the last four months to get the plan to the place it

is today and i want to recognize april and bobby who have worked on this plan quite intensely to make sure we can get to the place that it is right now. it is a large plan in a complicated plan. it has a lot of missing parts. both the planning department and the city's attorney his office has dedicated countless hours and basically unlimited resources to our office to make sure we get this plan through before the end of the year. i want to thank everyone that is involved. and the mayor's office. for helping us think through some of the knots in the plans that we really need to work out. i hope we can move this forward at a land use committee today and give this some daylight at the full board of supervisors. >> thank you. >> i am seeing this for the first time. i want to look at this real quick.

i want to make a comments before i'm sorry. >> if i may, deputy city attorney. this may help you as you look through the amendments. the planning department has submitted a new version of the implementation document for the clerk's file and the amendments members two-7 reflect the changes that the planning department has made to the document. they submitted that the clerk on and those changes reflect decisions that the planning commission and this committee have made in the past. those amendments conform the document to the decisions you have already made. item number 1 is an additional amendment to the ordinance that

supervisor kim is proposing today. the committee can only amend the ordinance and then the planning department will change the actual document later. so supervisor kim's amendment, number 1 on the list, addresses the old mint funding and says, we are accepting everything in the document that planning has submitted plus the board intends to fund the old mint, according to supervisor kim's proposal pick one final note that is the document itself as a guide for the city for future funding and doesn't bind the city. so that in each year, you will appropriate funds and the purpose of this document is to provide guidance for future boards in making those appropriations. >> ok. just to clarify, or amendment

number 1, this doesn't really belong in this ordinance. it goes in the implementation documents. >> because the board can't amend -- the document belongs to planning. the board -- the committee isn't amending the documents right now about $15 million to be allocated to the old mint and $160 million should be allocated to regional transit capacity. basically you are saying we accept everything in the document that planning is proposing except for this one piece which we will do differently. >> ok. as written on page 147, it is ok for us to adopt today. >> that's right. >> ok. ok. it is not my preference, given that i think it is important for the project itself to be able to move forward before even trying to commit future uses, even

though i absolutely support having the community space there , if that is what supervisor kim is proposing, it is a compromise. i would be ok with that. >> thank you. what i wanted to say is when i read this, the thing that would make me 100% comfortable would be to add language that says to a competitive process. i don't know how many nonprofit organizations or -- are associated with cultural districts under chapter 107 of the administrative code. but it talks about -- his says communities serving organizations. would you be amenable to that? we will be doing it through a competitive process. are there multiple organizations that fall under that chapter of the code. >> for what i understand, it is

-- i am not sure if compton's is an approved cultural district. ok. >> there are a few others that are in the works that have not yet been approved by the city including the african-american arts and cultural district. >> if i read this correctly, it says if the old mint is developed with this community serving space, then they would get an additional $5 million if they choose not to have this space than they would stay at $15 million. >> yes. that is the proposal. >> is there somewhere that is clarified later on the amount of space or a set up for negotiations? >> i would add to the language that says through a competitive process. >> ok. >> all right. i am not sure if this would be

done through the master tenant or through the city but i do support a competitive process. whoever it might be doing the process. the final decision maker. >> ok. >> they are conforming edits. >> i'm sorry i was a little confusing in my presentation. thank you for clarifying that. >> ok. should i talk about the one amendment that i want to bring back up or should we do it after public comment? >> it is up to you. why don't we go to public comment and we can continue that conversation. any members of the public would like to comment on item 7-11? please come on up. >> an afternoon members of the board. i am here for kilroy.

as you know from our testimony last week, we have been working closely with staff and the planning commission and 60 wholesale flower vendors to deliver a high-quality high quality project on the flower mart site. we have had to thread the needle carefully to design a functional wholesale delivery in a development that is compatible with late-night wholesale operations and capable of subsidizing wholesale rents for an important san francisco institution and one of its most important p.d.r. employers. to minimize conflicts between late-night operations, the project has been attacked from the outset, and all commercial and p.d.r. project. it contributes its fair share to affordable housing with some 55 million in jobs housing fees. last week, and amendment was proposed to restrict a portion of the site for housing. you heard from the sponsor and vendors that that was a problematic change due to the conflicts i just mentioned. with that said, we immediately started working with leading

advocates of affordable housing and representatives to enhance the project's housing benefits. in the past week, we reach an agreement in principle to provide a -- and affordable housing site of 14,000 square feet in the community, contingent on the flower market site being zoned for commercial use within -- without an on-site -- on-site resin but -- on site residential requirement. this would be a win for tenants who do not have to worry about conflict with residential and it would be a win for the city to have a housing site that would serve the neighborhood populations in need and not in luxury condos with a small inclusionary component. the zoning that was proposed by the -- or recommended to you by the planning commission has been carefully thought out. we urge you to restore that zoning this week when you take action on the amendments before

you. the project sponsor and i are here to answer your questions. thank you. >> good afternoon. my name is jake and i am a development manager with the real text inc. it is an honour to speak before you today. as i have been following this plan for the last four years. for those of you who aren't familiar, we are a local development firm focused on mixed-use multifamily housing. we have three projects within the central soma plan which total 400 residential units. i'm speaking today on behalf of the proposed hotel at 305th street. this is the only nonresidential project in the history of our firm. i would like you -- i would like to use my time to explain why we are pursuing a hotel and to ask you to consider what should be built in this location given the site specific restraints. there is a deed, a copy of which i have here which was used to convey title of the land.

it does restrict residential uses, particularly in mixed-use multifamily on the site. so it reads, using or improving the premises for residential purposes including multifamily residential uses is prohibited. this prohibit -- this prohibition runs with the land and applies to all successors in interest. october 1st, staff presented the planning commission process recommendations which included grandfathering provisions for hotels which we submitted in an evaluation. to date, we spent a lot of money and resources. it was submitted in october 2016 and we feel a hotel would be great in this location. in our opinion, the site can't be used for housing or office, what should be used for? is the highest and best use of

this site. i'm available for any questions. >> any members of the public who wish to comment on item seven through 11? public comment is closed. supervisor kim? >> we went through a couple amendments and i thank you had something else that you wanted to speak about? >> yes. i know we talked about this last time. i thought about it a lot more. i still am not comfortable with the 14-foot floor to ceiling p.d.r. exemption for the project we looked at the development restraints on the site and believe it is fundamentally a question between more office space and p.d.r. space. at the end of the day, given the office space tap, the amendments we are having to make to that and the idea that ultimately the site i was at a another site

that is under threat for p.d.r. space being demolished or displaced or existing the existing tenants. i. i like to make an amendment to put it at 17 feet as supported by the planning department for fourth and harrison project so that was on page 90, line 23. through not line 25 that we would make it the requirement as recommended by the planning department at 17 feet. >> what page was that? >> page 90 through 91. lines 21 -- 23 through 25. >> this does not get the planning commission even the discretion to consider lowering the ground floor to 14 feet as we had amended back in july. >> i understand. >> i know. i am asking. on my understanding correctly? >> just like every other site in

the district has a requirement to have 17 feet. that is what the planning department recommended department recommended on the site. may be we can ask the planning department. >> i am just clarifying what you're amendment is. >> i am verbally saying it out loud. we would be removing the amendment to provide a minimum of 14 feet so we would say minimum of 17 feet. >> just so -- i did also make an amendment in july that gives the commission the discretion to keep it at 17 feet or allow 14 feet. my question is, are you reverting back to the previous amendment which gives the planning commission the discretion to go either way? or i understand -- >> i understand. i would like to hear through the planning department and then i can clarify that. >> to be clear right now, there

are two auto places in the planning code where this site could have less than 17-foot space for p.d.r. it exists both in section 339 and the key sites exemption process, given the provision of certain amenities and additional sections that you are discussing on page 90. it is a section that grants it without discussion, essentially by rights. striking that out would still leave the planning commission and the discretion under section 329 to provide that exception. >> striking that outwards give the planning commission -- >> it still stays in the planning code. >> all the sites have the discretion? it is essentially -- it is discretion based on the planning department process recommendations and approval.

>> it is actually not all of the sites that would have the ability to seek that exception. there were certain exceptions that the commission is being granted for southern -- certain key sites based on the past years of analysis aren't on what the possible range of exceptions could be for each site. there is not a blanket allowance >> how many of the key sites have that flexibility? >> that one. >> so then, no. my amendment would be to remove the planning department's discretion all together and make it a minimum 17 feet. >> just to be clear, the commission still has the discretion and then have to be justified in the project sponsor would have to make a case. the commission is not obligated to make that. >> and just so it is clear, all of the key sites have this discretionary approval that are only limited to their key sites and so you'd only be singling

out this one project. the other key sites will be allowed to keep their discretionary approval. >> i understand. to the chair, it is only the discretionary approval as it pertains to 17 feet. all the other ones don't have that. >> that's true. there are a range of different specialized exceptions that are being provided. >> i am limiting mine. my amendment would be limiting the discretionary approval as it pertains to the florida to ceiling height on the ground floor to a minimum of 17 feet. they can keep all their other discussions. i am not my removing. that is not what my amendment is is that clear? is that clear? that would be what my amendment would be. >> so, we will take the motion. we will do a roll call vote on that one. >> ok.

>> on the motion to amend the legislation as stated by supervisor. [roll call] >> the amendment passes. >> i would like to make a motion to adopt the amendment as i articulated previously to public comment on page 147, line 6-18. >> are we adding in the language about a competitive process as well? >> yes. we can add in that language. do we need a vote on that when? >> we will do that without objection. colleagues, i would like to make a motion to remove this item -- move this item with a recommendation recommendation to the full board. >> we need. >> thank you for the reminder. i do want to strike.

let me pull up the section code. >> then i have another one. >> while you are doing that, can i make another comment? supervisor kim? >> go ahead. >> i am curious, after hearing public comment, it sounded like -- the reason i am waiting is because i want to ask supervisor kim this question. sorry. this is not related to the other thing. this is specifically to the flower mart site. >> what i heard from the presenters was in the one week

that we have had this conversation, they have made significant steps to having an m.o.u. signed that would talk about dedicating another site for affordable housing. so if that is the case, i would be in favor of removing the amendment that you proposed last week given the fact that they have made significant progress in the conversation with regard to affordable housing. i wanted to see what you had to say about that. >> kilroy did sit down with the community groups and are looking at another alternative to dedicating affordable housing within the central soma plan. we still have to continue conversations with all stakeholders and i have made a commitment to kilroy to do that before november 13th. i don't feel comfortable at this time striking that amendment. i will not be making that motion today.

but i will make a motion to strike 249.78 g. s. was placed in the ordinance last week. am i doing that correctly? >> i thank you are meaning to strike a section six, the unquantified section on page 236 of the ordinance. >> you are a mindreader. >> ok. i don't know why it is listed under that section but that is correct. we would be striking section six lines 11-25 on page 236. >> say that one more time?

>> section six what? what did you say? >> 11-25. i apologize. we have so many different versions here. >> that is what i have. >> there are a lot of versions with different edits on the website. but i believe what the amendment was to strike section six in its entirety. and that section is on page 237 lines six through 20. >> it is on page 236.

>> you allergic -- originally said section six, right? on my document it is 11325. >> the document you have printed out in front of you may include amendments that were circulated today which is why it is off. it is basically section six. the unquantified section at the end of the ordinance. in the public late notice document on 237. >> you made a motion to strike section -- section six. page 236 or page 237. 237 on the public document. >> do we need a roll call or can we do that without objection? we will do that without objection. >> through the chair, can i ask another question? on the points with the flower mart, i wanted to hear what you

had to say one more time. >> we need to continue discussions with all of the stakeholders on this amendment. i have made a commitment to kilroy to come to some kind of resolution by november 13th to the full board. i am not making an amendment to strike this today. >> i heard that. i wanted to hear the other part about the conversation. it seems pretty significant. >> we still haven't continued the discussion with all of the stakeholders. >> ok. >> ok. at this time, does the committee have any suggestions on how you want to move forward? >> i would like to make a motion to move this far with positive recommendation to the full board >> ok. can i recommend we do it without

recommendation just for a couple of outstanding items? >> that is totally fine. i will change my motion to move this forward and got recommendation to the full board >> ok. do we need to do a roll call vote? we will do that without objection. ok. are there any other items before us today? >> for clarity that was item seven through 11? >> yes. >> there is no further business. >> ok. thank you. we are adjourned.

>> hi everybody, we down here at the /ep is a center which is our pop up space down here in san francisco where we operate a store front to educate the policy from the home owner who has center which is our pop up space down here in san francisco where we operate a store front to educate the policy from the home owner who has never done anything in the house to the most advanced structure engineers we have working around here. we we're

going to here from kelly to talk a little bit about san francisco. how are you doing kelly? >> very well, thank you for having us here. >> in front of us, we have a typical soft story building. when i see this, i think this is some of the most beautiful architecture our city has. a lot of people don't know these are problematic buildings. why don't you tell us about some of the risks he we have in these buildings? >> soft stories are vulnerable in past earthquakes and the northridge earthquake to this type of building and character of building. when we talk about the soft story, what we're talking about is generally a ground story that has less wall or other /pwraeugs to resist the lateral forces that might be imposed by the earthquake. so we're looking for something that is particularly weak or soft in this ground story. now, this is a wonderful example of what some of the residential

buildings that are soft stories in san francisco look like. and the 1 thing that i would point out here is that the upper force of this building have residential units. they have not only a fair amount of wall around the exterior of the building but they also have very extensive walls in the interior and bathrooms and bedrooms and corridors and everything that has a certificate amount of brazing yea it's significantly less country /srabl in those stories. now very often, we get even a garage or storage or sometimes commercial occupancy in this ground story. that very often not only has a whole lot less perimeter wall but it often has little or no wall on the interior. that wall is the earthquake bracing and so he see very significant bracing in the top floor and very little on the bottom. when the

earthquake comes and hits, it tries to push that ground floor over and there's very little that keeps it from moving and degrading and eventually /paoerblly keeping it from a collapse occurring. so we know they're vulnerable because of this ground story collapsing >> is this only a problem we see in sentence france? san francisco? >> no, this is certainly a national problem. more acute in western but more up to california, washington, moving out into other states. this kind of building exist and this kind of building is vulnerable. >> when you're involved with the community safety, this is a different way of thinking about these types of things. we had a community group of over 100 people involved and upper 1 of them. tell us about * how that conversation went. why did we decide

as a city or a community to start fixing these types of buildings? >> there were a lot of aspects that were considered well beyond just the engineering answer that these are vulnerable. and that effort brought in a lot of people from different aspects of the community that looked at the importance of these buildings to the housing stock and the possible ramifications of losing this /houbgs in the case of an earthquake. the financial implications, the historic preserve vacation s implication as you mentioned, these are very handsome looking buildings that are importance to the tourist city ask which make san francisco something that people are interested from outside in coming and visiting. >> it's such animation story when you think about the 10 years that the community spent talking about this /seurb but we actually did something about it. now we have an order unanimouses put in place to

protect 100,000 residents in san francisco and retrospective in 2020. so on behalf of residents and employees in san francisco, we want to say thank you for the work you've done in pushing this forward and making people more aware of these issues. >> and it was a fantastic community effort. >> so in an earth quake, what happens in these kinds of buildings? >> what happens when an earthquake comes along is it moves the ground both horizontally and vertically. it's mostly the horizontal that we're worried about. it starts moving the building back and forth and pushing on it. when you see i'm pushing on it, the upper stiff of the wall stay straight up but the lower floors, they actually collapse just like i did there. >> luckily, we can put this building right back up where it came from so it's a lot easier. now kelly,

obviously these aren't real frame walls here but when you talk about buildings, what makes the property for stiff? >> the easiest and most cost-effective type of bracing you can put in is either put in a brand new wall or to potentially go in and strengthen a wall that's already there where you don't need to have an opening is where you maybe have a garage door or access to commercial space, you might go to a steel frame or other types of bracing systems that provides the strength and stiff if necessary but at the same time, allows continued use of that area. but some combination of walls or frames or other tools that are in the tool kit that can bring the building up to the strength that's required in order to remove the vulnerability from the building so that when ground shaking comes, it in fact is a whole lot more resistant and less

vulnerable. ideally, this story down here would be made as strong and stiff as the floors above. >> if i'm a property owner, what is the first thing i should do? >> the first thing you should do is find professional that can come in and help you evaluate your building in order to, 1, figure out that indeed it does need to be retro fitted and 2, give you some idea of what that retro fit might look like. and third, evaluation and design to help you determine the retro fit requirement. >> well kelly, i can't thank you enough for being here today. thank you so much for your wealth of information on how we can take care of our soft story problem in san francisco. and you the viewer, if you have any questions, please feel free to visit our website san francisco, 911, what's

the emergency? >> san francisco 911, police, fire and medical. >> the tenderloin. suspect with a six inch knife. >> he was trying to get into his car and was hit by a car. >> san francisco 911 what's the exact location of your emergency? >> welcome to the san francisco department of emergency management. my name is shannon bond and i'm the lead instructor for our dispatch add -- academy. i want to tell you about what we do here. >> this is san francisco 911. do you need police, fire or medical? >> san francisco police, dispatcher 82, how can i help you? >> you're helping people in their -- what may be their most vulnerable moment ever in life. so be able to provide them immediate help right then and there, it's really rewarding. >> our agency is a very combined agency. we answer emergency and non-emergency calls and we also

do dispatching for fire, for medical and we also do dispatching for police. >> we staff multiple call taking positions. as well as positions for police and fire dispatch. >> we have a priority 221. >> i wanted to become a dispatcher so i could help people. i really like people. i enjoy talking to people. this is a way that i thought that i could be involved with people every day. >> as a 911 dispatcher i am the first first responder. even though i never go on seen -- scene i'm the first one answering the phone call to calm the victim down and give them instruction. the information allows us to coordinate a response. police officers, firefighters, ambulances or any other agency. it is a great feeling when everyone gets to go home safely at the end of the day knowing that you've also saved a citizen's life. >> our department operates 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365

days a year. >> this is shift work. that means we work nights, weekends and holidays and can involve over time and sometimes that's mandatory. >> this is a high stress career so it's important to have a good balance between work and life. >> we have resources available like wellness and peer support groups. our dispatchers of the month are recognized for their outstanding performance and unique and ever changing circumstances. >> i received an accommodation and then i received dispatcher of the month, which was really nice because i was just released from the phones. so for them to, you know, recognize me for that i appreciated it. i was surprised to even get it. at the end of the day i was just doing my job. >> a typical dispatch shift includes call taking and dispatching. it takes a large dedicated group of fifrst responders to make ths department run and in turn keep the city safe. >> when you work here you don't work alone, you work as part of

a team. you may start off as initial phone call or contact but everyone around you participating in the whole process. >> i was born and raised in san francisco so it's really rewarding to me to be able to help the community and know that i have a part in -- you know, even if it's behind the scenes kind of helping the city flow and helping people out that live here. >> the training program begins with our seven-week academy followed by on the job training. this means you're actually taking calls or dispatching responders. >> you can walk in with a high school diploma, you don't need to have a college degree. we will train you and we will teach you how to do this job. >> we just need you to come with an open mind that we can train you and make you a good dispatcher. >> if it's too dangerous to see and you think that you can get away and call us from somewhere safe. >> good. that's right. >> from the start of the academy to being released as a

solo dispatcher can take nine months to a year. >> training is a little over a year and may change in time. the training is intense. very intense. >> what's the number one thing that kills people in this country? so we're going to assume that it's a heart attack, right? don't forget that. >> as a new hire we require you to be flexible. you will be required to work all shifts that include midnights, some call graveyard, days and swings. >> you have to be willing to work at different times, work during the holidays, you have to work during the weekends, midnight, 6:00 in the morning, 3:00 in the afternoon. that's like the toughest part of this job. >> we need every person that's in here and when it comes down to it, we can come together and we make a really great team and

do our best to keep the city flowing and safe. >> this is a big job and an honorable career. we appreciate your interest in joining our team. >> we hope you decide to join us here as the first first responders to the city and county of san francisco. for more information on the job and how to apply follow the links below.