-
Job Description
Marketing Statement
Ride BART to a satisfying career that lets you both: 1) make a difference to Bay Area residents, and 2) enjoy excellent pay, benefits, and employment stability. BART is looking for people who like to be challenged, work in a fast-paced environment, and have a passion for connecting riders to work, school and other places they need to go. BART offers a competitive salary, comprehensive health benefits, paid time off, and the CalPERS retirement program.
Job Summary
Salary
$141,610.00 Minimum to $ 214,540.00 Maximum / annually (Non-Represented Pay Band 8)
(Negotiable. Initial salary offer will likely be between $158,995 - 170,371, commensurate with education and experience.)
Who May Apply
All current BART employees and qualified individuals who are not yet BART employees.
Reports To
Director of Security Programs
Days Off
Saturday and Sunday
Department
BART Police Department is a progressive agency and has been on the forefront - and in some cases the model approach to training in the areas of fair and impartial policing, bias-based policing, crisis intervention, cultural competence training, and de-escalation training. The mission of the BART Police Department is to ensure a safe environment within our transit system, reduce crime through a highly visible police presence, and proactive enforcement of the law, and to promote public confidence by working in partnership with our stakeholders and the communities we serve.
Current Assignment
The Emergency Services Manager is responsible for developing and maintaining a comprehensive emergency preparedness plan that includes prevention/mitigation, preparedness, and response and recovery initiatives in coordination with the District's Emergency Operations Plan, with additional support to the District’s Director of Security Programs. The position serves as the liaison representing the District with various federal, state and local entities supporting all aspects of the District's Emergency Preparedness Program; provides education, training, and outreach to internal and external stakeholders ensuring that the District is prepared to respond to natural and man-made disasters and is responsible for providing highly complex administrative support to the Chief of Police and General Manager; and performs related duties as assigned.
The ideal candidate should demonstrate the following qualifications including but not limited to:
1. Operations of a comprehensive emergency preparedness management program, preferably in a transit environment
2. Strong skills and experience in the principles and practices of policy development, implementation and administration
3. Excellent communication, coordination and interpersonal skills in building partnerships with internal and external contacts
4. Must have completed required National Incident Management System (NIMS)/ Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) training and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) courses, Incident Command System (ICS) 100, 200, 700, and 800
5. Strong experience developing, implementing, and administering goals, objectives and procedures
6. Experience and skill in identifying and responding to sensitive community and organizational issues, concerns and needs
7. Knowledge of current and emerging emergency preparedness technologies and products and best practices for their use in transit systems
8. Knowledge and experience with current security related standards, protocols, and procedures for employees and patrons of a major metropolitan transit system
9. A Master's level degree in criminal justice, security administration, business or public administration is preferred.
10. Principles and practices of employee supervision, development, and coaching.
Other Requirements
Must have completed ICS 300 and 400 courses or (will be required to complete within two years of appointment).
Selection Process
Applications will be screened to assure that minimum qualifications are met. The selection process for this position may include a presentation, skills/performance demonstration, supplemental questionnaire, written examination, and/or an individual or panel interview. Candidates must pass each phase to move on to the next phase of the selection process.
Phase 1 : Minimum Qualifications: A review of each applicant’s employment application to verify possession of the minimum qualifications. Note that the hiring department may incorporate additional screening criteria or a supplemental questionnaire to identify candidates with the ideal knowledge and skills beyond the minimum qualifications.
Phase 2 : Oral Board Interview: Applicants who meet the minimum qualifications and/or additional screening may be invited to participate in the interview process.
Phase 3 : Second Round Interview which may include an interview with the Chief of Police or designee. Note that the Police Chief may employ the “Rule of 5” recruitment policy for final selection.
Phase 4 : Background Investigation (may include a medical exam, psychological, and polygraph exams if applicable)
The successful candidate must have an employment history demonstrating reliability and dependability; provide copies of certificates, diplomas or other documents as required by law, including those establishing his/her right to work in the U. S.; pass a pre-employment medical examination which includes a drug and alcohol screen, and which is specific to the essential job functions and requirements. Pre-employment processing will also include an extensive background check and successful completion of a polygraph exam. (Does not apply to current full-time BART Police Department employees unless specific job requires additional evaluations). If you are selected to proceed in the background investigative phase of the process, you will be asked to provide some essential documents.
The following are some of the documents you may be asked to provide: naturalization/citizenship papers, birth certificates, school transcripts, proof of selective service (men only), DMV driving history documents, proof of automobile insurance, marriage or divorce certificates (if applicable), and POST certificates (if applicable).
Candidates who are unsuccessful in the selection process can reapply for future job openings at a later date.
Examples of Duties
1. Supports the District with emergency preparedness functions and programs, including the study and analysis of vulnerability to disaster and response capabilities, long-term disaster mitigation plans and programs.
2. Maintains the operational readiness of key District facilities and systems for emergency operations, and manages compliance with the NIMS/SEMS, NIMSCAST and other rules and regulations.
3. Assists with the selection, identification, purchasing, and ongoing maintenance of emergency services equipment and supplies.
4. Provides training of staff and volunteers, including those assigned to the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and other such key roles. Ensures that regular EOC training, drills and exercises are conducted.
5. Ensures that the EOC, the Mobile EOC (MEOC), and other such key facilities and assets are well maintained and capable of supporting operations during a disaster or major emergency in cooperation with other supporting groups.
6. Supports the District with reports to the Board, coordinates with media relations, and coordinates with Public Information Officers (PIOs), and other Communication Department staff as necessary.
7. Stays current with emerging and established technologies and products and evaluates both for suitability and effectiveness in addressing the District's emergency preparedness needs.
8. Attends and participates in professional meetings; stays abreast of regulations, trends, and innovations in the field of transportation emergency preparedness.
9. Supervision, development, and coaching of subordinate personnel.
Minimum Qualifications
Education :
Bachelor's degree in Public Administration, Emergency Management, Transportation Safety or a closely related field from an accredited college or university.
Experience :
Five (5) years of (full-time) emergency management or related experience which must include two (2) years of supervisory experience.
Other Requirements :
• Must have completed required Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) courses (IS 100, 200, 700, and 800).
• Must work to complete ICS 300 and 400 courses within two years of appointment
• Must be physically able to perform field inspections and investigations.
• Must be able to work various shifts, weekends, holidays and overtime, and respond to emergency situations and calls.
• Must pass comprehensive background investigation and pre-employment polygraph examination.
Substitution :
Additional professional experience, as outlined above, may be substituted for the education requirement on a year-for-year basis. A college degree is preferred.
Environmental Conditions:
Office environment; exposure to computer screens; field environment; construction site/type environment; exposure to heat, cold, moving vehicles, stairs, cross passage doors, electrical energy and inclement weather conditions.
Physical Conditions:
Requires maintaining physical condition necessary for walking, standing, using stairs, traversing a construction-type environment, or sitting for prolonged periods of time. Able to lift up to 35 lbs.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge of :- Principles of a comprehensive emergency preparedness management program, preferably in a transit environment
- Incident Command System (ICS) and National Incident Management Systems (NIMS)
- Principles and practices of security-related oversight, compliance, and enforcement
- Principles and practices of policy development, implementation and administration
- Safety and emergency operations and procedures
- Current and emerging emergency preparedness technologies and products and best practices for their use on transit systems
- Current security related standards, protocols, and procedures for employees and patrons of a major metropolitan transit system
- Principles and practices of budget preparation and administration
- Related federal, state and local laws and regulations
- Incident Command Center (ICS) forms
- Implementing response planning and recovery
- Emergency Preparedness
- Knowledge of principles and practices of employee supervision and development
Skill/Ability in :- Developing and managing a comprehensive emergency preparedness management system, preferably in a transit environment
- Developing, implementing, and administering goals, objectives and procedures
- Identifying and responding to sensitive community and organizational issues, concerns and needs
- Researching, analyzing and evaluating new methods and techniques
- Understanding of budget preparation and administration
- Interpreting and applying applicable Federal, State and local policies, laws and regulations
- Communicating clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing
- Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of work
- Teaching a high value skill set
- Implementing response and recovery plan
- Instruct and/or present before groups
- Working knowledge of MS Office Programs (Word, Excel, PowerPoint)
Equal Employment Opportunity GroupBox1
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District is an equal opportunity employer. Applicants shall not be discriminated against because of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age (40 and above), religion, national origin (including language use restrictions), disability (mental and physical, including HIV and AIDS), ancestry, marital status, military status, veteran status, medical condition (cancer/genetic characteristics and information), or any protected category prohibited by local, state or federal laws.
The BART Human Resources Department will make reasonable efforts in the examination process to accommodate persons with disabilities or for religious reasons. Please advise the Human Resources Department of any special needs in advance of the examination by emailing at least 5 days before your examination date at employment@bart.gov .
Qualified veterans may be eligible to obtain additional veteran's credit in the selection process for this recruitment (effective Jan. 1, 2013). To obtain the credit, veterans must attach to the application a DD214 discharge document or proof of disability and complete/submit the Veteran's Preference Application no later than the closing date of the posting. For more information about this credit please go to the Veteran's Preference Policy and Application link at www.bart.gov/jobs .
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) prides itself in offering best in class benefits packages to employees of the District. Currently, the following benefits may be available to employees in this job classification.
Highlights- Medical Coverage (or $350/month if opted out)
- Dental Coverage
- Vision Insurance (Basic and Enhanced Plans Available)
- Retirement Plan through the CA Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)
- 2% @ 55 (Classic Members)
- 2% @ 62 (PEPRA Members)
- 3% at 50 (Safety Members - Classic)
- 2.7% @ 57 (Safety Members - PEPRA)
- Reciprocity available for existing members of many other public retirement systems (see BART website and/or CalPERS website for details)
- 6.65% employer contribution up to annual maximum of $1,868.65
Closing Date/Time: 10/6/2024 11:59 PM Pacific -
ABOUT THE COMPANY
-
-
BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
Show moreThe BART story began in 1946. It began not by governmental fiat, but as a concept gradually evolving at informal gatherings of business and civic leaders on both sides of the San Francisco Bay. Facing a heavy post-war migration to the area and its consequent automobile boom, these people discussed ways of easing the mounting congestion that was clogging the bridges spanning the Bay. In 1947, a joint Army-Navy review Board concluded that another connecting link between San Francisco and Oakland would be needed in the years ahead to prevent intolerable congestion on the Bay Bridge. The link? An underwater tube devoted exclusively to high-speed electric trains.
Since 1911, visionaries had periodically brought up this Jules Verne concept. But now, pressure for a traffic solution increased with the population. In 1951, the State Legislature created the 26-member San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission, comprised of representatives from each of the nine counties which touch the Bay. The Commission's charge was to study the Bay Area's long range transportation needs in the context of environmental problems and then recommend the best solution.
The Commission advised, in its final report in 1957, that any transportation plan must be coordinated with the area's total plan for future development. Since no development plan existed, the Commission prepared one itself. The result of their thoroughness is a master plan which did much to bring about coordinated planning in the Bay Area, and which was adopted a decade later by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
The BART Concept is Born
The Commission's least-cost solution to traffic tie-ups was to recommend forming a five-county rapid transit district, whose mandate would be to build and operate a high-speed rapid rail network linking major commercial centers with suburban sub-centers.The Commission stated that, "If the Bay Area is to be preserved as a fine place to live and work, a regional rapid transit system is essential to prevent total dependence on automobiles and freeways."
Thus was born the environmental concept underlying BART. Acting on the Commission's recommendations, in 1957, the Legislature formed the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, comprising the five counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo. At this time, the District was granted a taxing power of five cents per $100 of assessed valuation. It also had authority to levy property taxes to support a general obligation bond issue, if approved by District voters. The State Legislature lowered the requirement for voter approval from 66 percent to 60 percent.
Between 1957 and 1962, engineering plans were developed for a system that would usher in a new era in rapid transit. Electric trains would run on grade-separated right-of-ways, reaching maximum speeds of 75-80 mph, averaging perhaps 45 mph, including station stops. Advanced transit cars, with sophisticated suspensions, braking and propulsion systems, and luxurious interiors, would be strong competition to "King Car " in the Bay Area. Stations would be pleasant, conveniently located, and striking architectural enhancements to their respective on-line communities.
BART employees in the 1970s.
Hundreds of meetings were held in the District communities to encourage local citizen participation in the development of routes and station locations. By midsummer, 1961, the final plan was submitted to the supervisors of the five District counties for approval. San Mateo County Supervisors were cool to the plan. Citing the high costs of a new system-plus adequate existing service from Southern Pacific commuter trains - they voted to withdraw their county from the District in December 1961.
With the District-wide tax base thus weakened by the withdrawal of San Mateo County, Marin County was forced to withdraw in early 1962 because its marginal tax base could not adequately absorb its share of BART's projected cost. Another important factor in Marin's withdrawal was an engineering controversy over the feasibility of carrying trains across the Golden Gate Bridge.
BART had started with a 16-member governing Board of Directors apportioned on county population size: four from Alameda and San Francisco Counties, three from Contra Costa and San Mateo, and two from Marin. When the District was reduced to three counties, the Board was reduced to 11 members: four from San Francisco and Alameda, and three from Contra Costa. Subsequently, in 1965, the District's enabling legislation was changed to apportion the BART Board with four Directors from each county, thus giving Contra Costa its fourth member on a 12-person Board. Two directors from each county, hence forth, were appointed by the County Board of Supervisors. The other two directors were appointed by committees of mayors of each county (with the exception of the City and County of San Francisco, whose sole mayor made these appointments).
The five-county plan was quickly revised to a three-county plan emphasizing rapid transit between San Francisco and the East Bay cities and suburbs of Contra Costa and Alameda counties. The new plan, elaborately detailed and presented as the "BART Composite Report, " was approved by supervisors of the three counties in July 1962, and placed on the ballot for the following November general election.
The plan required approval of 60 percent of the District's voters. It narrowly passed with a 61.2 percent vote District-wide, much to the surprise of many political experts who were confident it would fail. Indeed, one influential executive was reported to have said: "If I'd known the damn thing would have passed, I'd never have supported it. "
The voters approved a $792 million bond issue to finance a 71.5 mile high-speed transit system, consisting of 33 stations serving 17 communities in the three counties. The proposal also included another needed transit project: rebuilding 3.5 miles of the San Francisco Municipal Railway. The new line would link muni streetcar lines directly with BART and Market Street stations, and four new Muni stations would be built.
The additional cost of the transbay tube -- estimated at $133 million -- was to come from bonds issued by the California Toll Bridge Authority and secured by future Bay Area Bridge revenues. The additional cost of rolling stock, estimated at $71 million, was to be funded primarily from bonds issued against future operating revenues. Thus, the total cost of the system, as of 1962, was projected at $996 million. It would be the largest single public works project ever undertaken in the U.S. by the local citizenry.
After the election, engineers immediately started work on the final system designs, only to be halted by a taxpayer's suit filed against the District a month later. The validity of the bond election, and the legality of the District itself, were challenged. While the court ruled in favor of the District on both counts, six months of litigation cost $12 million in construction delays. This would be the first of many delays from litigation and time-consuming negotiations involving 166 separate agreements reached with on-line cities, counties, and other special districts. The democratic processes of building a new transit system would prove to be major cost factors that, however necessary, were not foreseen.
-