so it was the mini pumpers. >> yeah. >> commissioner: okay. and, do you recall the amount? >> $700 thousand. >> commissioner: okay. i want to give a shout out to folks at the airport for getting a perfect test of results, 100% and that's fantastic. could we find out a little bit more about that from the chief about the airport. >> yes, ma'am. it's our yearly annual inspections for the park 139 and it encompasses the entire airport. everything from the remaining records to the amount of paint on the runways. it's a week long inspection and

the fire department has a large role in that in that the airport cannot maintain a certificate without an active fire department. we actually struggled from that early on. los angeles had theirs earlier this year, they had 20 efficiencies on theirs. so the airport is really happy about it, really psyched about it and, you know, waiting to do the same thing next year. >> commissioner: before you go, can you talk a little bit about the proposed additional two stations at the airport. >> they're redoing, they're rebuilding two of the stations. >> commissioner: i see. >> they're going to both be torn down. station one's going to be

moving because of an expansion at least they were planning to put in a new terminal where they want to have that and they don't want folks driving on to the airfield private car. but i was in a meeting just the other day where that might be pushed back probably another five to ten years now just because of the huge financial hit we took during covid even though the airport is getting a lot of funds under the recovery act that the president signed a few weeks ago, but still, a lot of it's being pushed back right now. >> commissioner: okay. >> they are doing some minor modifications to fire houses because of issues like mold and leaky roofs and stuff like that. >> commissioner: thank you for the update. i really encourage our new

commissioners to visit the airport and since the airport pays for the majority of what it cost to have three fire stations at the airport, that is a tremendous help to us and the visitors to san francisco and, of course, those of us who are happy citizens of san francisco. so go out to the airport if you get a chance. call first. [ laughter ] all right. thank you. that's all of my questions. >> president: thank you, commissioner covington. any of the commissioners have any further questions? i'm not seeing any hands. i have one topic i'd like to bring up and i think i should direct it to you, chief velo, and it is with regard to

station 35 which is the fire boat station. i guess assigned to peer 22.five. just one of the fire houses that sort of bobbles my mind. i have some concerns because it seems like we have been sort of hit a plaid meyer here or a stopping point here. i was fortunate enough to just so where i'm looking at little squares here. commissioner nakajo doesn't think he's the only one. i was picked up by chief rubenstein on saturday and was taken on a tour. part of it included station 35 and i can't quite remember when that was, chief rubenstein, but it was a few weeks ago and it

was, i mean, it's beautiful. it's in great shape. i first would like to ask you really in terms that i can understand, what is the problem with getting it done? i know it's a hook-up. i know it's a hook-up to electricity and am i correct in thinking that it's basically done except that it can't get bluged in basically, that there isn't a power source for it or am i incorrect about that? >> you're pretty close. they're not quite done, but the finishing touches are being done right now. and you are correct, the main delay and let me just give you a little backup on the times that we had originally. the substantial completion date originally given to us was february 5th, 2021. the final completion was supposed to be march 18th, 2021.

what we have right now is completion of august 19th and a final completion of september twenty-nineth. so we have six months or so delayed so far. now, every project has some delays because different things happen. this one in particular, the point of connection. the point where the grid connects to the fire station gives sufficient load to power the station and this station has not just, you know, we're charging the boats too and a lot of electrical issues that we have there. we get notified by d.p.w. last year in july that there was an issue with this. this project started in 2017 and there was a building -- sorry, electrical engineer assigned to this project. basically, we gave this project to a company. came through and then the actual building on top and then moved here to the station. so this part of the process was

done through that. at one point, the point of connection never connected and it was never addressed that it was not going to be enough at the point that was identified in the beginning of the process to begin at the station. what we have now is a different location that we identified. they're digging in the ground now to get that connection going and get enough power to the station. so it's frustrating to us because we should have been there already and we understand that. basically because d.p.w. pu.c. and this contractor. we're trying to figure out where the ball was dropped but it was dropped and six months now it's going to be delayed on this project. and it's unfortunate. >> president: let me ask you this. it is unfortunate, is it costing the department any money because we've got a

six-month delay that i don't think it appears was caused by anything the department did do or didn't do? >> it is costing us money. what i would say is if it had been addressed in the beginning of the project, there would still be some cost to it. >> president: of course. >> so we have to figure out how much the cost would have been how to address it in the beginning and to properly compared to what it's costing us to do an extension. it could have been that same connection that we have fund now and we're doing now. but there is additional studies, management from d.p.w. that's going to cost us. every time the project is delayed there's management costs. what it does for us. some of the projects that we are in desperate needs for now is not addressed here. that's our concern as well too. >> president: so is what you're saying is that the fire department is bearing the cost

of i will not use it in a legal sense, but a negligent design or a design that did not foresee that this station was going to need the power it was going to need where it was going to need it and that therefore it can't be hooked up as was initially designed. is that a correct statement? >> there was definitely a miss. i would say one thing is that the contractor is not getting paid as this project is not in the completion. because they have a penalty for no payment once the date has passed. they're fighting amongst themselves whose fault and somebody missed the point of connection, the sign from the electrical engineer point of view. >> president: all right. and, just so i'm, you know, still learning this stuff, is the department of public works the project manager? >> that is correct.

we have assigned a team that assists us with the project management of any project we do. >> president: and, are you obligated to use a project manager from the department of public works? >> according to the charter we are. there might be exceptions to legal means that can be excluded, but most of the cases, we are. >> yes. they have rates. >> president: and then does d.p.w. pay the liquidated damages for the towardiness and failing to miss the completion date by six months? [p

and management fees and all these -- these fees. and they're -- they're messing up. i mean, if i were to point a finger, i mean, if somebody didn't catch this. and that's what i'm trying to say. they can all point fingers at each other, but this is just eating into the bond money that should be dedicated to station

16. or replumbing the station commission cleaveland brought up, or whatever we need to do. you know, the bond money isn't going to be there forever. and to the extent we're eating through it because of negligent delay, this is not a service to the taxpayers. and it just obviously rattles me a bit. if i'm wrong, please correct me. and i speak -- sorry, commissioner rodriguez, i do see your hand. let me get that out, though. >> so real quick, what you said is true. you know, it goes wages in the bay area, they're getting paid in the bay area. so it's going to be a lot higher than say bakersfield or whatever. the other part about it and we talked some about this. of how, you know, the fire

department really should be able to have their own staff that works on their building, because 50 buildings is a lot of buildings. but i was talking to the head of another union in san francisco today and i mentioned to him what the cost that d.p.w. is charging per member. so, let's say i make 160 -- or $190,000 a year, right? that's going to include my wages and my health and welfare and my, you know, benefits. so, when the cost -- say, $190 thousand, you would think, at least i did, the work is not being done privately. it's public work. it's for the city. then why are they making so much

money? i think they quoted maybe close to $400,000 a year per worker. and to me, that's really bad. i think when you work with people, you have to kind of -- not expose them for what they are in public, because you're going to ruin a working relationship forever, but i really think even the labor business managers of some of the unions here in the city i talked to regarding this, said, yeah, this problem has been going on forever and the unions have complained, because sheet metal, plumbing, carpenters, their union members work for the city under city contracts. so the unions know what their members make. and they know what d.p.w. would

have to pay those members. it's atrocious that they would almost double the -- the wages of the works for a department that is in the city. >> well, i mean, i really agree with you, commissioner rodriguez. and i just happened to look up because we have had plumbing problems. we all know we've had plumbing problems. some of it is age. some of it is maybe things that just occur in life at the station. but the prevailing wage for a union plumber in san francisco is $121.05 an hour. if you multiply that -- which mr. corso would do much quicker than i can -- but if i do it, say they work 40 hours a week,

not counting overtime or double time, 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year. they never go on vacation. you're looking at $258,000 per year. not $400,000 a year. i want to be clear here we're sucking up bond money, which is a detriment to the citizenry, or sucking up department money which is a detriment to the

i believe it was close to $400,000 for station 16.

and we were told that, no, d.p.w. would -- that money, because they spent it on management fees. >> yes. i remember that conversation well. and, so, i do share the frustration on the part of the chief and her command staff, as well as my fellow commissioners. we just need to figure out how to correct this, because this is unfair and unjust. that's all i have to say. >> thank you. >> commissioner cleaveland: president, i am -- i think it's very ironic, quite frankly, that the department of public works was put in charge of managing all the construction projects

and the maintenance projects in the city so there wouldn't be any corruption. getting their buddies to do the plumbing jobs at the fire stations that need it. and here we are with the public works department. so it's ironic their management of our processes is costing us such a huge markup, quite frankly. and if those same dollars were given directly to the fire department to manage our own maintenance, i bet you we could get a lot more value out of every dollar from those bonds, as well as from our general fund every year. so that's my only comment. it's very ironic. and i would like to see us as a commission look into what it

would take to make those changes. i would like to see the language that says we have to use public works to manage all of the construction projects. i'd like to see the language. and perhaps pass a resolution urging changes in that. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner cleaveland. i agree with you 100%. that i think that as leaders, that's what our job is. and this is just appalling to me. just appalling. so, further comments? maureen, i can't -- i'm so busy being appalled, i can't remember if we did public comment or not. >> we did call for public comment. >> president feinstein: all right, thank you very much. i'm going to then move along. and thank you, chief o'con, er,

for your patience. i'm sorry, forgive me. >> we are all set to begin? >> we are all set and you have the ball. >> all right, let's see if we can do this. all right, good evening, president, vice president, commissioners, chief, i'm assistant deputy chief tom o'connor and i'm honored to give this presentation. i'm going to start in 1906, but don't panic, i'll get to 2021 very quickly. so the 1906 earthquake put to rest the debate over the construction of the emergency fire-fighting water system. originally pleaded for by the chief sullivan, who ironically

enough was to die during the earthquake and never see his system be built. but he advocated for a dedicated emergency firefighter water system for years and years and years. and that's a loss of over 28 builds, 300 san franciscans, the chief saw it finally become realized. in 1908, san francisco approved a bond for -- very briefly, you have the core facilities. you have the reservoir holding 10.5 million gallons. the jones street tank. station 1, here at headquarters,

down in the basement, pump station 2, we foot of the van ness, which can pump 10,000 gallons per minute. we have 135 miles of pipe. 1600 high pressure hydrants. 229 cisterns. and five manifolds for our fire boat. so, the original a.w.s.s. or auxiliary water supply system, you'll hear interchangeable terms. a.w.s.s. and there is also e.f.w.s., the emergency fire-fighting water system. which is a all of them together. it was transferred to the puc and they conducted an initial assessment and found that only

40% of san francisco had the reliable enough water supply to fight fire generated after a 7.8 earthquake. if you could see on the map, i'm not sure if it's big enough. but the light blue areas in the western and southern neighborhoods, they had the lowest scores, meaning they're not served by the a.w.s.s. system out there and they serve coverage in these neighborhoods. this is when bonds used to be issued to improve and strengthen our system. there is also research demonstrating the vulnerabilities of urban areas to fire following earthquake. the greatest issue is a failure of water supply systems in post earthquake suppression activities. with every earthquake, you have x number of ignitions, whether it's chemical, gas, or electrical. and you're going to y number of

water main breaks. it's this intersection of x and y where you have the greatest problems post earthquake. and certain researchers, dr. hawthorne, have noted that planning emergencies together have been incomplete. in 2011 study, he called for a greater liaison between fire departments and water departments. so we kind of looked back at this paper in 2011, the birth of the puc and the liaison position where water departments and fire departments are viewed as coequal in the fire-fighting activity, because the best fire-fighting is going to worthless without water at hand. the duties and responsibilities of the liaison is to oversee and

facilitate all efforts related to the puc management. the water supply system. to coordinate all puc in expansion of the a.w.s.s. system. to manage the portable water supply. lead strategic planning efforts. and representing the department at meetings and community events. now the shared goal of the puc and the fire department obviously is to improve and expand our water supply system. so in 2010, added additional $54 million to the efforts ecertificate.

we have 6 pipeline an tunnel projects completed. seismic upgrades that are almost completed at pump station 2. it's capable to feed lake into a future a.w.s.s. system. and we have university mound reservoir connection to the a.w.s.s. system. now, in 2018 and 2019, there was a grand jury report entitled act now before it's too late, expand our high pressure emergency fire-fighting water system. they found despite the improvements of 2010 and 2014, there were still very large swaths of san francisco that were without adequate water supply in the event of a disaster or earthquake. in the civil grand jury made the following recommendations. they want to address water

systems throughout san francisco. as interim measure, they called for purchasing 20 water supply vehicles. they wanted the city to conduct research on the west side of san francisco. they want us to present a more detailed analysis of the emergency fire-fighting water system needs, so a water demand analysis done on a block by block basis. originally, there were reports done in 2014 and 2018 that looked at the city through fire response areas. or they followed the first alarm areas of firehouses. and they did analysis of water demand after an earthquake for every first alarm area, but the grand jury wanted that broken down for a more granular look at how much water we do need in event of a disaster. they called for a full plan to be presented to the board of supervisors for the emergency fire-fighting water system by december 31st of this year. and they refugee -- requested

that the budget and legislative analyst review. eser 2020 was a response to the civil grand jury. the board of supervisors put the bond on the ballot. and the bond passed overwhelmingly with $623.5 million in funding. and the specific projects for this bond were west side, potable emergency fire-fighting system, a manifold and as i stated early, a salt water pump station analysis with the feasibility of building a pump station on the west side of san francisco. the biggest component of the bond obviously is the west side -- madame president -- the

potable emergency fire-fighting water system. this is a hybrid solution to the original solution. it was designed to meet the robust standards that the fire department had. but it's going to utilize the same or better earthquake resistant pipes. on the right, it's earthquake resistant pipe. it's a flexible iron pipe used in japan for many years and its withstood earthquakes of 8.0 on the richter scale. we're going to build a better, faster stronger in the richmond and sunset districts. and the potable emergency fire-fighting water system has two main benefits. number one, it's going to give us that high pressure water supply we need. but it's also going to supply an additional source of drinking water after a disaster.

so, the water main breakage that i was talking about earlier post earthquake, they're going to leave large portions of san francisco without water, but with this new pipeline in the neighborhoods, this will be a secondary source of water to help during the recovery and rebuilding phase after an earthquake. as you can see in the diagram, this is from the budget and legislative analyst report. the alignment for the west side is going to run from lake merced pump station up to the yellow piping into the red zone, into the sunset district, up through the park and then into the richmond. and it will actually stop up around this region of the richmond as phase one. and that's phase 2 will bring it back in the loop past sunset and back to lake merced. so there are two phases for this new rollout.

but the first phase is funded by the eser 2020 bond. this also has four connections to water sources at two locations. we have lake merced pump station which generates 30 million gallons per minute. and then the hetch hetchy. and lake merced, we can pull water out of the lake that holds 1.2 to 2 billion gallons. and we have a feed from sunset reservoir with a feed from north basin and the hetch hetchy regional water supply. during the up coming projects with the eser 2020 bond, we have the completion of the study that has to be presented to the board of supervisors by june 30th of this year. we have the completion of the neighborhood detailed analysis, again by june 30th of this year. we have to develop a comprehensive city-wide plan by december 31 of this year.

and that will analyze whether the board of supervisors want to present another separate eser bond just solely for the a.w.s.s. system as well as securing additional post tenders to bridge the gap until we get the full up and running. i included a map from one of the draft. this broke san francisco down into five regions for the salt water pump station study. we have the southern dunes. you have the rocky area south to china beach. then you have the rocky north. then the north bay front from port point to pier 23. and then the east bay front. and each of these areas present, you know, geological and engineering challenges to set up another salt water pump station.

but the most challenging aspect of that study is the intersection of all these areas run into so many different regulatory bodies, that it could take years and years to get the permitting necessary to build them. and i can give you a brief run down on some of them. there is the california coastal condition, bay conservation development commission, california land commission, regional water control board, fisheries and i could go on down the list. it's a confluence of so many regulatory bodies, i think that will be our greatest challenge with the salt water pump station. nothing insurmountable, but it's down the road quite a bit because of the challenges. we have all the reports due in june and december this year. we took it on ourselves to begin the drills. we've had an exercise at pump station 1 here, with the puc and

the sfd performed together. we did a demonstration of district 11 for supervisor safai. we did another host demonstration this saturday which was attended by wheelchair nicholson, and chief finkelstein. tomorrow morning at 9:00, we have a tabletop exercise with the puc simulating an earthquake and working on our disaster protocols. and we're working on setting up security demonstration city-wide for awful the supervisors to show our strengths and weaknesses we have in different districts. we can show them the strengths in district 1 and 3. and the lack of resources in 11, 10, 4, 7. we really want to have the decision-makers be comfortable with what we're presenting and what we need moving forward.

i've been lucky in this position that i'm working with a lot of agencies that are planning so far ahead. we're looking at eser -- a.w.s.s. in 2040, 2050. and trying to map out the growth of san francisco and where we need to build this system so we don't get into another situation like pre-1906 where we're saying we need to build it out. we're building it out prior to the disaster that will be coming our way. so that in a nutshell is the roles and responsibilities and duties of the puc liaison. and i can answer any and all questions you may have. maureen, do i take it away? >> there is nobody on the public comment link? >> president feinstein: thank you, madame secretary. public comment is therefore closed. and as soon as -- i can see everybody again. questions or comments from the

commissioners? commissioner cleaveland? >> commissioner cleaveland: madame president, and thank you chief o'connor. great report. great update. we have needed this for some time. and i had a quick question. and that is do you think we'll be able to have that comprehensive city-wide plan done by december 31st of this year? >> absolutely. we're already working on estimates for the distance between hydrants right now and pipe overlays in the richmond and the hunter point area. and trying to give a robust presentation to supervisors to show what we need and need to do. i'm confident it will be done. it's in the early initial draft stages, but i think by december 31st it shouldn't be a problem at all. >> commissioner cleaveland: once we have the report, we can go to city hall and say we need a special eser bond just for the auxiliary water system upgrade,

correct? >> exactly. exactly, commissioner. >> commissioner cleaveland: thank you. thank you, madame president. >> president feinstein: thank you. any further comments from any commissioners? commissioner nakajo. >> commissioner nakajo: thank you very much, madame president. thank you. that was a comprehensive report totally. i wanted to ask basic questions and before i ask my two questions, one of them i think you delivered it in the sense of how this would be financed. and i heard commissioner cleaveland talk about the eser bond. one of my questions was a projection of what it's going to cost in terms of expense to produce this overall. i think you answered my question as to when you think this would be completed.

i'm talking about the complete system. and i'm not sure my notes look like 2050. can you address both of them? but first, can you address, if you think you need to, i didn't hear -- unless i missed it -- the description of clean water versus salt water. and how that plays between the truck systems and pumping systems. i asked that because i think part of the report was the information on how much it would cost to do a pump station that used salt water. so i just wanted to be able to get clarity, is the system set up to use two levels of water resource? clean as well as salt? and i'll stop there, chief. >> sure, commissioner. so our current system, the

a.w.s.s. is cleared to use both fresh and salt. the salt is used to as a last ditch attempt if the tanks are drained. we can pump into the system through 1 or 2. and introduce salt water to the system. that's the backup to the backup. when we look at the new potable in the richmond and sunset district. it's a dual use system, it's for fire-fighting needs and a secondary source of drinking water. you would only introduce water from lake merced under an emergency order if this was the conservation of unimaginable proportions. but to have the ability to introduce it in the system, you have to flush it out again, issue a boil water order.

then work on the salt water pump station, but in the interim, there is the capability to introduce lake merced into the system for the richmond and sunset districts. i can't a fire big enough we couldn't put it out with lake merced, but we do have that capability. >> commissioner nakajo: i think that answers my question, because part of this was clearing up for me that there was information presented to me that said that clean water through the system is a good system compared to if we needed to use salt water, there is a system. but there was some discussion that our pipes -- our hoses would be compromised once we used salt water. and i didn't know if that was compatible with our system. and if we did use it, i heard

you say, we have to flush our equipment. and to me, that takes time. unless there is a system that takes in salt, flushing it out and gets it into clean. chief, is that anything you else you want to share with me on that -- or us? >> i hear you, commissioner. it would take time, but this is backup to the backup. we really had a bigger ahead of us. it's to be prepared for the worst of the worst. in 1989, it was the backup to the backup, to the backup. the fire boat with the hose tender. so we want plays in our playbook available. >> commissioner nakajo: okay. one more question, chief. you talked about the eser bond

financing this. is that correct? and then what kind of dollar figure are we talking about with this eser bond? i'm just curious in terms of that. and did you confirm that this might be complete by 2050? that sounds way out there. >> we're putting together a variety of options for the board of supervisors, what we hope to look like in 2030 and 2040, between the bond measures being put out now. once the final design is conceptualized, then it's costed out. then we say, here's the cadillac, the buick and the mitsubishi model. which one will the voters go for? part of the demonstration is to have the supervisors be familiar with our disaster preparedness and what the costs will be. generally speaking, the

reception has been fantastic so far because it's nice to talk to the decision-makers in a casual atmosphere and let them see the equipment we have. let them meet the members, the chief and the command staff. and yourself, commissioner, it was great you came out. it shows the importance of disaster preparedness and to impress upon them what we need to do going forward. >> commissioner nakajo: one last piece. at one point i served in the commission and that grand jury finding in terms of the reference that you made, it was there that i served. this has been a long subject matter as your presentation indicated. that grand jury, i'll use the term kind of kicked me in the behind to kind of accelerate. and being a person in san francisco that experienced -- one of the questions was where were you? because it was a lifetime

experience with that. for myself speaking. but i couldn't imagine if -- went up and there wasn't a system that we could deal with in terms of basically putting it out. thank you very much, chief, i appreciate your information. madame president, thank you. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner nakajo. chief nicholson? >> chief o'connor, do you know how many days of fire-fighting for these water sources would run out? do we have any sort of estimates on that? i feel like there was some talk of it, but it has escaped my brain. >> there is a variety of modelling going on with the water demand study. so, what it's contingent upon, and thinks the work of dr. hawthorne, he estimates it will be 90-100 ignitions.

you the of those 90-100, 20 can be put out by citizens. this is where i feel mucky. you have the ignition and then the discovery by the citizen and then there is the reporting phase. which is the third part of the equation. the reporting phase is the most difficult, because communications will be down. phone lines will be jammed. so getting the fire reported and as we all know fire grows exponentially, that's the biggest sort of unknown variable as to how big the fires will grow. then there is response. and then there is suppression. so some of the fires will be held to content. some will be a fifth alarm. so it's all -- it's all -- there are estimates from 24 to 72 hours and the other unknown variable of how many water main breaks there may be and how many failures of the a.w.s.s., the

old system. so there will be a range of answers on the water demand needs before that comes out and we're still kind of working the variables on that. we're can looking at a host of issues for the report and the draft, and we don't know as to how many gallons of water yet. we have rough estimate. and we don't know how many hours to put the fire out. i guess long winded way of saying i'm not sure, but it will take a lot of time and a lot of water. >> thank you, perfectly clear. [laughter] >> other questions? from any other commissioners? commissioner covington? >> i don't have a question so much as a comment. and that is when we found out

that the civil grand jury was going to be looking into what they considered deficiencies, we really did not know what that meant. and when the report came out, it was tremendously informative. and it really help bolster the department's assertions that there are certain things that need to be done and money has to be put behind those things. so, the grand jury report, the civil grand jury report, was extremely helpful to us. in terms of getting the focus where it should be, which is what do we do next to prepare? so, i thank the grand jury because they're like us, they're citizen volunteers. they're not paid for doing this

research. and talking to people. and formulating some ideas. so, it really is good. and our headquarters of the pump station as well. which is also very nice to know that headquarters has a very, very good chance of surviving. whatever comes. all right, thank you. >> thank you. further questions? i see none. thank you. chief o'connor, very, very informative and you're right, i'm still learning the acronyms. and i'm getting better. but i really appreciate it. thank you very much. and i know the other commissioners do as well. anybody else?

okay. madame secretary? >> no public comment. >> president feinstein: all right. public comment is closed. thank you. >> item 5, commission report. report on commission activities since last meeting of april 14, 2021. >> we know commissioner nakajo has been very, very busy. he's been all over the place. anything you'd like to add, commissioner nakajo? >> commissioner nakajo: ask questions about how things are as they roll out. i'm cautious to -- [indiscernible] -- my -- [indiscernible]

[indiscernible] -- be there in an official capacity was great. >> president feinstein: i think there is something the matter with your audio. we're only getting every other word. is anybody else having trouble hearing? >> yes. i thought it was just me. >> i'll conclude. that's all i need to say. >> oh. commissioner cleaveland. >> commissioner cleaveland: i have the pleasure of having a meeting with the leaders of the guardians of the city this past month. a couple of weeks ago actually. with james lee, paul berry and dave eberle. and they -- i think we need to invite them to come and be -- make a presentation to our commission at some future date.

they've been working on a strategic plan and they should have that finished shortly. i did discuss the meeting i had with them, with the chief following that. and passed on the suggestions that they would to see a representative. it's been one of those things, they haven't had a representative from the fire department on the gotc board, which is the non-profit organization that represents the fire department, the police department and the sheriff's department in terms of their historical vehicles and apparatuses and maintains really the history of our department and the other two departments as well. both of those departments, other departments, have representatives who regularly attend and participate and speak on behalf of their departments as these g.o.t.c. meetings. and we desperately need to have representation from the fire department on the g.o.t.c.

board. so i would like to see that happen. and hopefully that can happen as soon as possible through the appropriate channels. there is also a need for outreach to the members. the 1800 or so members of the fire department, how many of our members of the fire department even know what g.o.t.c. stands for. or do they know much about the history of the fire department? do they know much about the effort to preserve and restore the historic vehicles and apparatuses that we have -- that we still have? and then lastly, they requested that the monies from the willman fund, that is under our direction as the commission, that they requested that the balance of the willman fund be transferred to the g.o.t.c. so that's something further for us as a commission to consider at some future date.

that's all i have to report. thank you, madame president. >> president feinstein: thank you, commissioner cleaveland. any further comments? reports? all right. madame secretary. >> there is nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: public comment shall be closed. >> item 6. agenda for next and future fire commission meetings. discussion regarding agenda for next and future fire commission meetings. >> president feinstein: requests? commissioners? yes, commissioner cleaveland? >> commissioner cleaveland: i would like this reiterate my interest in having the g.o.t.c. put on a future agenda. not necessarily next week or even next month. but when they are ready, i'd like to have them on the agenda

to present more than just where they are today, but where they've come are from and a -- from and a little history of the organization so that the general membership and the fire department can learn the importance of g.o.t.c. and learn a little bit about the history and the general public would have an opportunity to learn a little bit about how they can become involved in helping to preserve our fire department's history. so, that's it. >> president feinstein: anybody else? >> vice president rodriguez: this is for chief o'connor. thank you for your report. i've been wondering where this was going to go eventually.

obviously, there is such a big need for this. when you talked about a salt water, would that be like a duplicate of what you have at the end of van ness street? >> no, that was built in a different time and era where permitting wasn't as important. so open water intake like that is subject to a lot more scrutiny now. so i don't think it would be along the same vein, but something similar to that. it all depends on where you put it. the open water one can be cheaper because you can get closer to the pipeline, but there are more regulatory agencies and permitting fees are higher. it's a slant well, where you dig down under the coast and into the sandy layer of the ocean so there is less wildlife restrictions. but you have a longer pipe are-run to get out there. they all present challenges, but

no, we don't build one similar to the two-pump stations we have now, because they're grandfathered in from the early 1900s where there were less agencies looking over it. >> thank you. >> president feinstein: yes, commission covington? >> i wonder, madame secretary, do you have a list of topics that have been presented previously? >> well, i have suggestions. i have nothing set in stone for the next meeting or the future. but we have cost recovery for surf, cliff and bay rescues. slow street. and an update from chief on division of training and status on current academy class. >> okay. i think we have slow streets and

also what are the spaces? you know -- >> shared spaces. >> shared spaces, yes. it was also on that. on this, i believe. unless they're two different things. i don't have anything to suggest. i was just wondering what was out there that we have expressed interest in and getting more information about. >> any further suggestions from the commissioners? or command staff? all right. >> there is nobody on the public comment line. >> president feinstein: very good. public comment is closed. thank you. >> item 7, adjournment. >> i move that we adjourn. >> i second. >> president feinstein: vote to

adjourn. >> vice president rodriguez: aye. >> commissioner nakajo: i affirm. thank you. this meeting is adjourned at 6:53. >> thank you. >> thank you, everyone. >> thank you.

>> you don't know what will be inside the canister until you open it. [♪♪♪] >> these are beautiful, historical drawings of san francisco. these drawings range from 1908 to 2010. [♪♪♪] [laughter] >> i build muscle. a lot of people don't know this,

but we have a full team of architects that designed specific buildings and public safety. sometimes it is creating a brand-new building from the ground up. other times it is giving new life to one of our historic structures. [♪♪♪] >> i had to have some degree of artistic skill from a handcraft point of view to become an architect at that time. it is an incredible amount of loss, in my opinion, to not draw by hand. that skill of having to manipulate a pencil or a pen to make line wait and to make the drawing we've. i have seen this development of technology and this huge transformation in the world his that you do leave some things behind that have beauty to them. [♪♪♪] >> now a day, technologies a completely different. we're not using paper, we are not using paint pencils, but we are using computers to model our

buildings to produce drawings, it is different craftsmanship. >> in addition to the beautiful drawings, the person who was taking care of our file for almost 30 years was the one who organized those drawings and listed all of them in big binders with all the name of the projects, and they were still using these which is amazing. >> 840. we are building an electronic archive of all the drawings for future use. the scanning project started back in march, 2018. we have scans about 36,000 sheets of paper and there's the remaining balance of 93,981. we can do about 100 sheets per day. hopefully by february 2020, it will be completed. >> we feel that our collection

of historical drawings represents san francisco's a rich history. not only do we help make history , we also preserve it for the benefit of future generations. >> madam secretary, call the roll, please. [roll call] >> clerk: and we have a quorum, madam president. before we start, i'd like to make an announcement. this meeting is being held via teleconference and is being televised by