Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the AWSS topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fire Department says AWSS plan advanced; public criticizes pace and transparency
Summary
During public comment and department reports, a resident called for faster AWSS work; the Fire Department and PUC say a third‑party analysis recommended a preferred option, PUC has identified $40 million, and the plan will be presented to oversight committees in early February.
Public concern over an Auxiliary Water Supply System (AWSS) for the city’s western neighborhoods surfaced at the Fire Commission’s Jan. 24 meeting and was addressed in subsequent department reports.
Tracy Thompson opened public comment by saying she attended the Jan. 10 meeting to raise concerns about the lack of an adequate way to fight a large fire in western and southern neighborhoods. She asked directly, "Is there any of this $33,000,000 requested, by the SFFD for AWSS?" and said the public had limited access to the PUC’s options analysis, noting she had to request the report rather than finding it posted online.
Chief Joanne Hayes White and Deputy Chief Janine Nicholson described ongoing collaboration with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Chief Hayes White said SFFD has “a very healthy partnership with the PUC,” and that the department participated in a side‑by‑side review of a report analyzing more than a dozen options. She said a third‑party report by Professor Charles Cawthorn recommended option 12 and that the department agreed with that recommendation.
Hayes White and Nicholson said PUC staff have identified about $40,000,000 to move the recommended option forward and that further review will occur before bond proposals in the 2020 range. They said they would present the plan to the Board of Supervisors’ Government Audit & Oversight Committee on Feb. 7. Nicholson added the technical PowerPoint has been condensed for lay audiences and recommended inviting PUC staff to a future commission briefing to explain details.
Commissioners sought more public detail. Chair and commissioners consistently requested additional public‑facing information on what immediate steps are being taken outside long‑range bond funding, and asked staff to return with more detailed descriptions of ongoing measures to protect Sunset and Richmond neighborhoods until larger projects are funded.
The department said it is at the table with PUC and maintains final sign‑off on matters related to fire suppression; it also noted past PUC‑funded water projects and additional cisterns and pump upgrades completed with bond funding.
Next procedural steps: a presentation to the Government Audit & Oversight Committee on Feb. 7 and continued coordination with PUC and supervisors; commissioners asked staff to provide a more detailed, public summary of near‑term protections and the path to construction if the PUC plan is approved.
