Even after Texas floods, S.F. has no plans to fix its defunct tsunami warning sirens
Though the system has been defunct since 2019 and officials have discussed whether to fix or replace the sirens, Mayor Daniel Lurie did not include funding for it in his budget proposal that the Board of Supervisors is set to approve within weeks. The cost of repair or replacement has been estimated as high as $20 million, and cell phone alerts, while far from a perfect warning system, is the primary technology the city relies on.
Still, the deadly Texas floods and the lack of a siren system there stirred debate online.
'This horrible event in Texas should be a sign for our local elected officials to take action and not divert money to other programs and get this done now,' one San Francisco resident posted on Nextdoor.
The mayor's office referred the Chronicle to the San Francisco Department of Emergency Management for questions about the sirens. The department did not comment specifically on plans for the defunct warning system.
Emergency officials said the siren system was 'paused for maintenance and assessment in 2019' because officials found 'much of the infrastructure was no longer functional,' and that the costs to repair it would be 'substantial.'
When the sirens were turned off, the expected price tag to boost the system's security and reliability was about $2.5 million, but the money was never allocated. In 2023, then-Supervisor Aaron Peskin tried to fast-track the project with a $5 million injection of funds, but then-Mayor London Breed didn't include the funding in her budget.
The cost of an entirely new system is expected to be upward of $20 million, before factoring in the operating costs, and it could continue to grow the longer the city waits.
For the city, the question has been whether the system should be repaired or replaced.
Lurie did not identify any funding for the repair or replacement project in his proposed budget, which seeks to close an $800 million budget gap with funding and staffing cuts.
Without the sirens, the city still has other ways of communicating danger to residents.
'The recent tragic flooding in Texas is a powerful reminder of how critical it is to reach people quickly and effectively during emergencies,' emergency management department spokesperson Leah Greenbaum said in a statement. 'While Wireless Emergency Alerts (WEA) and cell phone-based systems like AlertSF are essential tools, we know no single method reaches everyone. That's why we're continually working to improve how we alert and warn the public.'
The WEA are 'short emergency messages from authorized federal, state, local, tribal and territorial public alerting authorities that can be broadcast from cell towers,' according to FEMA, while the city's own AlertSF system does the same thing but also sends text messages and more localized warnings.
The department said it is 'committed to reaching as many people as effectively as possible in an emergency and continues to build on our alert and warning programs.'
Former FEMA and California Office of Emergency Services emergency management expert Art Botterell said the sirens can only be part of a wider emergency response network — they can't be the only way people are notified.
'You have to look at sirens in coordination with other systems — like WEA alerts, which work well in urban environments but struggle in less developed areas,' Botterell said, like where floodwaters have wrought devastation in Texas. 'It's easy to get fixated on a single warning technology like sirens — but there is no magic bullet that works best in all circumstances.'
Botterell said sirens are best for wide open areas where large crowds need to be warned of danger. Botterell said that places along the coast could use the sirens, such as Ocean Beach, where tsunami warnings should be as loud as possible. Otherwise, the sirens can actually be primitive warning systems, he said.
'Sirens are essentially a one-bit message,' Botterell said. 'They don't give you any insight into what to do next.'
Botterell added that new construction techniques in the past several decades have made sirens essentially obsolete. Advances in window and insulation technology mean most homes are so closed off from the outside that sound has trouble reaching inside. Boterrell called it an 'unintended consequence' of tech advancements.
Today the best warning systems are pocket-sized: everyone has a mini siren on their phone, he said. He said he's not surprised the city isn't funding a replacement for the sirens.
The city's emergency management department also made clear that warnings are no substitute for good emergency planning.
'Notification is just one part of San Francisco's comprehensive emergency preparedness strategy,' the department said. 'We encourage all San Franciscans to take steps to prepare themselves and their families for disasters.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
a day ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
California parents have a new option to save for K-12 private school — but there's a catch
The GOP tax megabill signed into law in July had a provision tucked into it that could help parents who send their kids to private school. As students head back to school this month, a disproportionate number in the Bay Area will be at private schools: In several counties, rates of attendance are more than double the 8% statewide average. Nearly one-third of K-12 students in San Francisco attend a private school, according to data website Private School Review. That attendance comes with a hefty price tag. The average amount a family would spend to send their child to private school in San Francisco from kindergarten through high school graduation is about $520,000, according to a Chronicle data analysis. To help cover those costs, parents will soon be able to leverage an increased amount from 529 education savings plans. What are 529 plans and how are they changing? Created by Congress in 1996 and named for a section of IRS code, 529 plans are tax-advantaged investment accounts operated by states or educational institutions designed to help save for a child's education. They were originally intended to cover college or trade school costs, but since 2018, the law has allowed families to withdraw up to $10,000 annually from 529 plans for K-12 tuition without paying a penalty or federal taxes on the growth. Starting next year, under the tax and spending bill signed by President Donald Trump on July 4, the K-12 withdrawal limit increases to $20,000. The bill also expanded what K-12 expenses could be covered. Under previous law, only tuition for K-12 was eligible for federal penalty-free 529 withdrawals; under the new law, expenses like books, tutoring, standardized and AP test fees, and educational therapies for students with disabilities are all considered qualified expenses. Some states have changed their laws so parents don't pay a state penalty or tax on those K-12 withdrawals either. But not in California. K-12 expenses are still considered nonqualified expenses, so you'll pay a 2.5% penalty plus state income taxes (as high as 13.3%, depending on your household income) on the taxable growth when you withdraw 529 funds for those purposes. Given that, does it ever make sense in this state to use your kid's 529 funds to pay for their private school tuition or other pre-college educational costs in California? It could. Here's what experts say. The case against using a 529 for K-12 expenses Richard Pon, a certified public accountant and certified financial planner, has a son who's enrolled in private school in San Francisco. He said he doesn't use 529 money to pay for it. The first reason is the state income taxes and the 2.5% penalty. The other reason is the flexibility of 529 funds: Even if your child gets a free ride to college with room and board paid for, those funds could be used to pay for graduate school, professional certifications like a CPA license or nursing license, or get rolled into an IRA. You could also roll the 529 funds into an account for another child or relative, or a friend. And if you're using 529 funds to pay for elementary school, that means they don't have time to grow in the market before your child goes to college — though, of course, there's always a chance they could drop between now and then, too. If you're really in a financial bind and paying for your kid's private school tuition from their 529 means the difference between paying your mortgage or not, then yes, it could make sense to tap those funds — though many 529 accounts are protected by federal law in bankruptcies, so if you're truly at the edge of financial peril, you may want to leave the money in that account alone. In general, Pon said, 'I would think about holding this (money) as long as possible instead of saying, 'Hey, I'll use it for K-12.'' The case for using a 529 to pay K-12 expenses For some families in California, it might make sense to pay K-12 educational costs from a 529, said Sean Pyles, a certified financial planner and the host of NerdWallet's 'Smart Money' podcast. He said to think of 529s less as college savings accounts and more like flexible education savings accounts. When it comes to the tax question, parents can do the math and see if using the funds for K-12 expenses pencils out. 'What it's going to come down to for each person is figuring out whether they are going to be coming out ahead by actually reaping tax benefits from this account, or if, given the amount (of taxes and penalties) that California imposes, it's just not going to be financially beneficial to them at this point,' he said. For parents making the investment in private schools for their kids, it's probably worth checking with an accountant, financial planner or other tax pro to see if the math makes sense.
San Francisco Chronicle
4 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Tariffs are slamming Bay Area Indian restaurants and grocers. It could get worse
During a recent lull between customers at Alameda's Shanvi Indian Kitchen & Grocery, owner Vikas Aggarwal took some time to update his prices on a point-of-sale tablet. Sacks of basmati rice, fragrant spices and packs of frozen naan will now cost customers 10%-20% more, and prices may rise further due to the Trump administration's 25% tariff on Indian imports, which took effect Aug. 7 — and which the president has threatened to increase to 50%. When Aggarwal buys his goods from distributors, 'Now even the invoices mention to 'please increase prices at the store,'' he said. Indian restaurants, grocery stores and food importers around the Bay Area are beginning to feel the shock of one of the highest tariff rates placed on a major U.S. trading partner. And unlike earlier rounds of tariffs, business operators told the Chronicle they must now pass on higher prices to customers — an example of the way that sometimes delayed tariff impacts are finally catching up to U.S. consumers. The Trump administration is justifying its tariffs on India as a sanction for purchasing Russian oil, with President Donald Trump vowing to increase tariffs further if U.S. and Indian leaders do not come to an agreement by Aug. 27. Last year, U.S. goods imports from India totaled $87.3 billion. San Francisco's oldest Indian grocer, New India Bazar, is preparing for that possibility. 'No deal could be signed before the deadline,' predicted owner Auro Bhatt. 'India has also got a very strong stance and the countries are not talking about a compromise.' At his Polk Street store, customers from across the city shop for lentils, dosa batter, spices and Hindu idols. Bhatt recently received an invoice for an $800 order, with an added-on $80 tariff fee clearly itemized. He has adjusted his prices accordingly, but still opts to take small hits to prevent total sticker shock. A bag of lentils may have to go by 50 cents, for example, but he may raise the price only 40 cents. Yet because customers often fill their baskets, the small increases add up quickly. 'It comes as a shock to them that they will be buying the same amount of items, but the total bill has gone up by a lot,' he said. Shanvi owner Aggarwal works with around 15 distributors, which has allowed him to shop around to offset tariff-related increases. Still, he said customers are quick to express dismay at checkout. 'They'll tell me, for example, 'last time a product was $2.99, why is it $3.50 now? '' Amod Chopra operates Berkeley's popular Vik's Chaat, as well as a wholesale distributor and market. He has been paying the extra duties to get to his shipments of saffron, beer, rice and other goods from the Port of Oakland. For some time, he did not pass on the new costs to customers, having built up an inventory brought in at a lower tariff rate. Now that these reserves have run out, he's been forced to finally raise prices. 'I don't have 10%, 25% or 50% in my margins to just eat that cost,' Chopra said. 'When the previous inventories deplete, you have no choice,' Chopra already had to contend with higher demand and increased freight prices during the peak buying season for Indian goods earlier this summer, when tariffs were just 10%. A shipment of lentils, rice, pantry goods plus the spices he will be using at Vik's Chaat for the next year were much higher than he's paid in past years, he said. To retrieve a $66,000 shipment, he had to pay $6,600 in tariffs. That price would have been $16,500 under the new rate. Escalating tariffs can often take several weeks to be felt, Chopra said, as the fastest sea freight route from India can take 40 days to arrive. The impact is more immediate for air freight. Shipments en route to the U.S before a tariff increase will have the lower levies, even if they land after a higher rate is in effect. Trump has justified his tariffs, considered a form of tax, by declaring a state of emergency to bypass Congress. In theory, his goal is to increase U.S. production of goods. But the U.S. does not have the appropriate tropical climate to grow in-demand spices such as cinnamon, clove and nutmeg. India is the world's largest exporter of spices, and spice imports from India into the U.S. in 2024 were valued at more than $410 million, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Diaspora Co., one nationally acclaimed Bay Area business that imports high-quality spices from India to the U.S., was on track to turn a profit for the first time in three years in 2025. Then came the new tariffs. If they stay in place, the company estimates it will pay $200,000 in tariffs this year, founder Sana Javeri Kadri said. Diaspora has already spent $25,000 in tariffs to date — essentially, the business' profit margin. If the 50% tariff takes effect, rather than implement a blanket price increase, the Diaspora Co. website will show customers how much tariff they're being charged per order. The 50% tariff would translate to an additional $1.50 per tin, Javeri Kadri said. This means single-origin black pepper, Diaspora's best seller, would cost $13.50, and saffron grown by a third generation farmer in Kashmir, almost $20. 'We so deeply don't want to pass on prices to consumers,' Javeri Kadri said from Mumbai, where she was on business. 'It really is a lose-lose.' Higher tariffs are also expected to squeeze Indian restaurants. Chef Srijith Gopinathan is perhaps the best known Indian chef in the Bay Area. At his celebrated Cal-Indian restaurant Copra, he taps into his memories to highlight the flavors of his native Kerala. He uses fresh produce and meats from Bay Area purveyors across the Bay Area, offering a break from tariffs. Still, his kitchen is filled with irreplaceable Indian ingredients and equipment like grinders and special biryani pots. 'To make a biryani, you would need cinnamon, cloves, and cardamom. Indian cooking is all about blends,' he said. 'You cannot get Basmati rice from a different country,' he went on. Versions of the crop can be produced elsewhere, but like Champagne, it's a geographically indicated product grown on the Indian subcontinent. 'It has to be from India,' he said.
CBS News
6 days ago
- CBS News
San Mateo Sheriff Christina Corpus' attorneys make last-ditch attempt to halt removal hearing
At a San Mateo County Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday, the legal team representing embattled Sheriff Christina Corpus made another attempt to halt the upcoming hearing proceedings aimed at her removal. Corpus is facing potential removal from her elected position after voters in March overwhelmingly approved Measure A, a charter amendment granting the supervisors temporary power to remove the sheriff on grounds of misconduct. Measure A was the board's way of removing Corpus, who remained defiant against calls to resign after the release of a scathing, 400-page investigation by retired judge LaDoris Cordell alleging that Corpus had an inappropriate relationship with her chief of staff and fostered a culture of intimidation and retaliation in the Sheriff's Office. As part of the removal proceedings, a Measure A hearing is set to begin Monday and last 10 days. In addition, a separate trial is scheduled for September after the county civil grand jury accused Corpus of having a conflict of interest in the hiring of her chief of staff, Victor Aenlle, with whom she has a close relationship. The civil grand jury also alleged that Corpus retaliated against three of her staff members. At Tuesday's board meeting, at least four of Corpus' attorneys showed up in a last-ditch attempt to halt next week's hearing. They requested that the supervisors pause the Measure A hearing and instead hold the civil grand jury trial first. Attorney Tom Perez, who served as the former U.S. secretary of labor during former President Barack Obama's administration and as a senior adviser to former President Joe Biden, spoke for more than 10 minutes during public comment. Perez recently joined Corpus' team of lawyers, and originally requested one hour to speak to the board at Tuesday's regular meeting, according to a letter he sent to board president David Canepa and County Attorney John Nibbelin. The board denied that request. "I sent a letter last week, and I'm here to make a specific request," Perez said to the board at Tuesday's meeting. "The request is that the civil grand jury proceeding, which would give the community a voice in this matter, proceed first, and the reason for that is so that the community can weigh in." Perez spent the next 10 minutes of his speech defending Corpus against accusations made in the Cordell report and trying to highlight her accomplishments and track record as sheriff. He mentioned Corpus' response to the 2023 Half Moon Bay shootings, and the reduction in violent crimes and property crimes seen in 2024 during Corpus' tenure. He attempted to discount allegations that Corpus and Aenlle had an intimate relationship, and also discussed the challenges she faced as the first woman of color to be elected sheriff in the county. "We are here to defend her vigorously, and we will bring the truth forward," Perez said. "We will prove the negatives." None of the board members responded directly to Perez's request during the meeting. A statement from county spokesperson Effie Milionis Verducci said San Mateo County fully intends to move forward with the Measure A hearing next week. "The county remains committed to defending the integrity of the lawful Measure A process and we look forward to the hearing taking place, beginning August 18," she wrote. It was Corpus' latest attempt to stop the removal proceedings, having filed multiple requests to halt the Measure A process through temporary restraining orders. "The Sheriff has now asked three different judges to stop the removal process and all three have refused, allowing the process to move forward," Milionis Verducci said. Monday's hearing will be open to the public after Corpus reversed her initial request to keep it closed. "Let the public see the facts," Corpus said in a statement announcing her decision in late July. "Let them hear the truth. Let justice pierce the veil of corruption and bring light where darkness has reigned for far too long." Tuesday's meeting also included an agenda item in which the board heard a presentation recommending the establishment of a full-time inspector general to oversee the Sheriff's Office with subpoena power. Kalimah Salahuddin, the chair of the county's Independent Civilian Advisory Commission on the Sheriff's Office, gave the presentation explaining the benefits of having an inspector general. The ICAC is comprised of nine appointed members who offer recommendations to the board for encouraging transparency and accountability in the Sheriff's Office. An inspector general, Salahuddin said at the meeting, would have "the ability to hold impartial investigations into allegations of misconduct, both internally and externally, to be able to review internal investigations for fairness and then support ICAC when issues are brought to our commission." For some members of the public, the addition of a full-time inspector general to oversee the Sheriff's Office has come at an important time given the current upheaval the department is facing surrounding Corpus. "Over the past year, we have witnessed the complete unraveling of the Sheriff's Office," said deacon Lauren Patton McCombs during public comment. She is a member of the Coalition for a Safer San Mateo County, a group of community organizations that support civilian oversight of the Sheriff's Office. "The time to act is now. I encourage you to follow the recommendation of ICAC and hire a permanent inspector general to prevent any future problems developing within the Sheriff's Office. Don't wait until a new interim sheriff is appointed." The board did not take a vote on whether to hire an inspector general during Tuesday's meeting.
