With just 17 percent of registers voters participating in this year’s election for mayor, sheriff, district attorney and a host of ballot measures, results came in as expected.  Incumbent mayor Gavin Newsom maintained his post with a landslide victory over the 11 challengers, none of whom were able to garner even 10 percent of the vote.

And Newsom won yet another victory with the defeat of Prop. E, which would have mandated that the mayor appear monthly before the Board of Supervisors to answer questions in a forum modeled after the British parliament’s question time between lawmakers and the prime minister.  The only measure on the ballot that had no financial impact on the city was rejected by a slim majority of voters — 51.6 percent.

With 100 percent of votes tallied, the unofficial results according to the S.F. Department of Elections:

Gavin Newsom: 67.75%
Quintin Mecke:   8.33%
Harold Hoogasian:  6.53%
Wilma Pang: 5.71%
Ahimsa Poter Sumchai: 2.96%
John Rinaldi: 2.31%
Josh Wolf: 1.64%
Lonnie Holmes: 1.44%
Grasshopper Alec Kaplan: 1.36%
H. Brown: .86%
George Davis: .60%
Michael Powers: .50%

Ballot Measures:
A — Yes 55.24%
B — Yes 71.06%
C — Yes 68.39%
D — Yes 74.31%
E — No 51.64%
F — Yes 51.46%
G — Yes 55.36%
H — No 66.62%
I — Yes 58.81%
J — Yes 62.33%
K — Yes 61.68%

Though incumbent Mayor Gavin Newsom is expected to have a cake walk to re-election Tuesday, the 11 challengers hoping to unseat him have done just about everything to try to keep the race interesting.

Newsom has kept his distance from the eccentric crowd, which gathers outside City Hall every Friday evening to debate the issues in an informal forum that looks more like a circus. Over the 12 weeks of the campaign, his opponents have formed a friendly coalition — competing against each other while subscribing to the group-wide mantra, “Anyone But Gavin.”

After each debate, the candidates walk down to Temple Bar, a nearby watering hole, where unexpected friendships have emerged.

“There’s definitely a spirit of camaraderie amongst nine or 10 of us,” said candidate Josh Wolf, who originally proposed the collaborative campaigning tactic the candidates have embraced. “We’re more powerful working together than we are apart.”

And together, the group is as diverse and eccentric as the city it wishes to represent.

There’s Wilma Pang, a Chinese music teacher; “Chicken” John Rinaldi, a self-described “showman” known for his affiliation with Burning Man, and Josh Wolf, a 25-year-old freelance journalist who was jailed last year for refusing to give authorities footage of a San Francisco protest.

Ahimsa Porter Sumchai, whose resume touts years of medical service in the city’s Bayview neighborhood, is perhaps one of the more mainstream candidates. But even Sumchai, a reserved and issues-oriented candidate compared to the rest of the field, has a playful side — the 55-year-old physician dressed in leather for last Friday’s debate in the Castro.

Michael Powers owns a sex club in the city, says he once spent three years as a woman, and announced Friday he’s pursuing a sex change. Harold Hoogasian, an Armenian flower shop owner and coffee farmer, is the most conservative of the group — and he plays the part, decked out in a suit and tie while smoking a cigar with opponent H. Brown, an arts and politics blogger known for his inflammatory speeches.

“Grasshopper” Alec Kaplan, whose speeches are frequently interrupted for a hefty drag off his ever-lit joint, drives a purple minivan taxi for a living — the taxi is also his home. And George Davis, a nudist who says he’d make Golden Gate Park clothing-optional if elected, debates in the buff every Friday despite frequent harassment from the city’s cops.

The other three candidates, Newsom, Quintin Mecke and Lonnie Holmes, have stayed away from the collaborative — a campaigning tactic that originated last year during the campaign for supervisor of District 5.

Mecke is program director for the Safety Network Partnership, which promotes public safety and community responses to crime and violence; served on the San Francisco Civil Grand Jury and currently serves on the Board of Directors for CounterPULSE, an organization dedicated to the arts.

Holmes, a San Francisco native, is programs director at the San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department and guest lecturer at UC Berkeley. His resume touts years of public service, from coaching football for the S.F. Jr. 49er Pop Warner Football League to raising funds, toys and other donations for low-income families during the holidays.

Despite the refusal of Holmes, Mecke and Newsom to participate in their collaborative, the nine candidates who gather weekly outside City Hall say they’ve had a blast working together over the past few months.

“We hang together despite our own campaigns,” said Pang, 66. “Grasshopper even gives me rides.”

Hoogasian and Powers, the two Republicans of the group, said they respect all the candidates and feel the media hasn’t taken any of the nine seriously enough.

“I’ve found that these people are people that I would look at for commission appointments,” Hoogasian said. “There’s a lot of great people in this group.”

And Davis agreed.

“These are the inmates of the asylum,” he said, referring to the 1966 French film King of Hearts. “But I’d have to delegate to someone.”

With the help of an audio system mounted to the top of Kaplan’s cab, the candidates spend a couple hours each night discussing how they envision the future of San Francisco, what they’d change about the city’s laws and what they think of the media.

The scene is always boisterous, with added entertainment from write-in candidate Kenny the Clown, who juggles fire sticks throughout the debate and occasionally participates, answering questions pedaling back and forth on his adult-size tricycle. Grasshopper blows pot smoke in the face of the conservative, straight-laced Hoogasian, and Davis occasionally takes his clothes off, just to show he’s serious about promoting free-body culture.

But in the end, one candidate will emerge victorious, and it’s unlikely that candidate will be anyone from this pack.

Until then, the 9 continue to playfully harass Newsom — from a singing telegram Rinaldi sent to the mayor’s office last Friday to this week’s final meeting outside the incumbent’s window, where Grasshopper opened the debate with a guitar performance atop his minivan.

“Legalize prostitution and make Newsom walk the streets,” Kaplan sang to cars passing by City Hall. “Vote for peace, love and Grasshopper.”

H. Brown

“My promise is to fire your boss. That would be 61 department heads and hundreds of commissioners, agency and authority directors and their PR staffs. I will replace them with veteran city employees from within those departments, agencies and authorities.”

“I believe in God, judgment and the SF 49ers.”

H. Brown is a journalist and runs a blog, sbulldog.com, which discusses arts and politics in San Francisco.

George Davis

“This is a one issue campaign which is to make Golden Gate Park clothing optional like the major urban parks in Europe. For other policy issues, a well-known city manager will be appointed.”

George Davis says he sees his campaign as part of an international movement to promote a free body culture. Author of “Naked Yoga,” Davis has dedicated his life to promoting this lifestyle. Check out his website: gonakedyoga.com

Since beginning his campaign for mayor, Davis has been arrested by San Francisco police four times for being naked in public — charges he says the San Francisco district attorney has cleared him of.

Lonnie Holmes

“I know San Francisco should use an intelligent approach to public service to make every neighborhood safe.”

A juvenile programs director at the San Francisco Juvenile Probation Department and guest lecturer at UC Berkeley, Holmes is also a youth football and basketball coach and has worked to raise money for child education efforts and providing food for low income families.

Harold Hoogasian

“San Francisco’s budget and payroll is out of control. I will stop the ridiculous, unending increases.”

The most conservative candidate of the bunch, Hoogasian, a flower shop owner and coffee farmer says he will reign in government spending and stop government waste.

“Grasshopper” Alec Kaplan

“Legalize everything. Legalize prostitution and sex work; make it safe. Make everyone happy. No problems, only solutions. Legalize cannabis; greens for peaceful purposes.”

A Russian-born but longtime San Francisco resident, Kaplan drives a purple minivan taxi, which doubles as his home.

Quintin Mecke

“San Francisco can do better. The promises that were made four years ago have been left unfulfilled and it is time now to move forward in shaping a city that is reflective of the values that it is known and respected for.”

Mecke touts a long resume of public service, from director of public safety systems to volunteering with the U.S. Peace Corps.

Gavin Newsom

“We are the first American city to launch universal health care. We are taking bold action on climate change. We helped lead the fight for civil rights such as marriage equality. We won the stem cell center because the nation knows we are a capital of innovation.”

The incumbent, Newsom says he’s proud of his achievements since becoming mayor in 2004 and is asking for an additional term to continue with his agenda. But his first term has been riddled with controversy — particularly surrounding his love life, where within his first term, the mayor went through a divorce, was reported to have briefly dated a 20-year-old restaurant hostess, then admitted to having an affair with his campaign manager’s wife.

Wilma Pang

“As a single parent and grandmother of four, I have raised three college degreed (one PhD) daughters through the SF public school system.”

A lifetime renter and long-time San Franciscan, Pang is a professor at City College of San Francisco and volunteers her time to preserve the cultural heritage of Chinatown as well as helping immigrants study to pass the country’s naturalization exam.

Michael Powers

“My creation of the Power Exchange adult sexual liberation experience shows my capacity to embrace every kind of alternative lifestyle and manage multiple environments housed in one totally law-abiding and successful business.”

Powers has been a nighclub owner in San Francisco for 11 years, has a two year degree in criminal justice and claims he once spent three years as a woman.

“Chicken” John Rinaldi

“Am I dumb enough to think I can win? Not really. But I do believe I can win the losing vote, and that’s why I’m asking you to vote for me for second place. Think of it as an intellectual exercise, designed to raise the level of conversation.”

A self-described showman, Rinaldi has been associated with the annual Burning Man festival and claims he converted his truck to run on coffee grounds.

Ahimsa Porter Sumchai

“Ahimsa means ‘no killing.’ I grew up in public housing, attended public schools and represented San Francsico at the 1970 White House Conference on Youth.”

Sumchai has worked as a helicopter physician, emergency physician to the San Francisco Giants and specialist for the Department of Health. She was recently endorsed by Iraq war protester Cindy Sheehan.

Josh Wolf

“San Francisco is faced with many pressing issues that need real solutions. In a true democracy, such solutions properly arise from the people themselves. I’m running to help create such a democracy.”

Wolf, a freelance journalist, was jailed last year for refusing to give authorities footage he’d shot of a 2005 demonstration in San Francisco. Wolf now works at the Peralta Colleges television station, a public access, student-run organization.

Despite Mayor Gavin Newsom’s hefty lead over the 11 challengers vying to unseat him in this year’s mayoral election, some say the city’s new voting system to take effect for the first time this year could have allowed an underdog a chance — if any of the challengers had been able to secure public campaign funds from the city.

Candidates who were able to raise at least $25,000 in campaign contributions could have qualified for public campaign funding, where the city would have matched what the candidates raised on the street.

But since none of the 11 candidates running against Newsom could garner enough cash to seriously challenge the incumbent, challengers say Newsom has been able to cruise through the campaign without even having to seriously debate his opponents.

“I had a strategy. I would have won,” said “Chicken” John Rinaldi. “People like me. I’m a likeable character.”

With ranked-choice voting this year replacing the traditional runoff election, San Francisco voters will be able to vote for three candidates in order of their preference. This means that while many are expected to take Newsom for their first choice, two additional choices remain.

“Ranked choice voting allows the voters in San Francisco to rank up to three candidates for the same office,” said Charles MacNulty of the San Francisco Department of Elections.

Mayoral candidates like Rinaldi, “Grasshopper” Alec Kaplan and Josh Wolf — a coalition that calls themselves the “Anyone But Gavin” group — said they were hoping one of the 11 long shot candidates would be able to win the office thanks to the new system.

Rinaldi, 39, said his chances of unseating Newsom, the highly popular incumbent, were lost when the city denied him public campaign funds. Unable to get the word out about his candidacy, Rinaldi said his once viable dream of becoming mayor is no more than a pipedream now.

“Anyone who would vote for us isn’t voting for Gavin as their second choice,” said Rinaldi, who was hoping to win the race by garnering enough second place votes to put him over the top.

Unless Newsom wins 50 percent or more of the first choice votes, ballot counters will have to take the ballots of those voters whose first choice received the lowest amount of votes and instead count those voters’ second choices. The process will continue until one candidate emerges with 50 percent of vote.

But some candidates say they still believe they’ve got a chance, thanks to the new system.

“It’s gonna shock the shit out of everybody, but I’m gonna win,” said “Grasshopper” Alec Kaplan, a homeless taxi driver campaigning on a platform of legalizing marijuana and prostitution.

Harold Hoogasian, one of two Republican candidates, thinks he can draw enough disgruntled conservatives to unseat the left-leaning Newsom. When asked who he thought would win the race, Hoogasian replied with a simple, yet serious, “me.”

The other Republican of the bunch, Michael Powers, said he’s not sure who will win, but that the ranked-choice voting is sure to make the results interesting.

“It’s going to be the most unique and unusual vote,” Powers said. “The split is going to be interesting and it’s going to cause a huge, unique outcome.”

Josh Wolf, a 25-year-old freelance journalist who organized weekly debates between nine of the less mainstream candidates, said the new system could lead to a drastic change in the city’s political system.

“Ranked-choice voting has allowed this to happen,” Wolf said of the collaborative campaign, which consists of nine eccentric and unusual candidates for mayor. “We’re only beginning to see all the wonderful things we can do with it.”

Prop. A — Transit

This measure would give more power to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, an unelected governing body created in 1999 to have reform oversight over MUNI. Under Prop. A, the MTA would be given more authority over MUNI, parking, taxis and bike lanes and would have access to $26 million per year to spend improving MUNI.

Supporters say placing all transit under one politically independent group — the MTA doesn’t have to worry about reelections — will make it more efficient for the city to affect emissions reductions to 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2012.

If approved, this measure would nullify another transit-related measure on this year’s ballot, Prop. H, a parking space measure.

Sponsors: Supervisors Peskin, Ammiano, Daly, Dufty, Elsbernd, Maxwell and Mirkarimi.

Contact: (415) 554-5184 or Supervisor Peskin’s office at (415) 554-7450

Prop. B — Commission hold-over limit

The way commission positions are handled today, commissioners are appointed by the mayor to serve a specific term during which they cannot be removed if their actions anger the mayor — the intent being to provide commissioners the political independence to make sound choices. But once their terms have expired, the mayor can keep commissions at their appointments in a “hold-over” status, which means they maintain the position but can be removed any time in favor of a new appointee, making them politically vulnerable and less likely to make decisions that would anger the mayor.

Prop. B would limit to 60 days the amount of time the mayor can keep commissioners in hold-over status without reappointing them or appointing someone to take over the post.

Sponsors: Supervisors McGoldrick, Ammiano, Alioto-Pier, Daly, Dufty, Elsbernd, Maxwell, Mirkarimi, Peskin, Sandoval

Contact: (415) 554-7410 or (415) 554-5144

Prop. C — Public hearings for ballot measure proposals

Rather than allowing city supervisors to simply place a measure on the ballot without holding a public hearing to debate and discuss the merits of the measure, Prop. C would require the supervisors to hold a public hearing at least 45 days before placing a measure on the ballot.

Sponsors: Supervisors Elsbernd, Peskin, McGoldrick, Alioto-Pier, Maxwell

Contact: (415) 554-5184

Prop. D — Library Preservation Fund

The Library Preservation Fund, approved by voters in 1994, guarantees public funding of San Francisco libraries. With the ’94 measure set to expire next year, Prop. D would extend public funding for another 15 years.

Sponsors: Supervisors Peskin, Maxwell, Elsbernd, Alioto-Pier, Mirkarimi, McGoldrick, Dufty, Ammiano, Sandoval

Contact: (415) 554-5184

Prop. E — Question Time for Mayor

Despite last years passage of a policy statement — a non-binding ballot measure that indicates the city’s desire to do something — that would require the mayor to appear before the Board of Supervisors once a month for what would be similar to the Question Time used by the British Parliament to question and debate the country’s prime minister, Mayor Gavin Newsom’s response to the 2006 initiative was to hold neighborhood meetings where the questions are scripted and chosen in advance by his staff.

Newsom says this year’s measure is not necessary, citing his “open-door policy,” under which he is willing to meet privately with any supervisor on any issue. The mayor opposes a public forum for Question Time, saying the city’s supervisors are too confrontational and the public nature of Question Time will lead to political grandstanding.

But the matter will be left to voters. Prop. E would this time mandate that the mayor appear before the board once a month.

Sponsors: Supervisors Daly, Ammiano, McGoldrick, Mirkarimi, Peskin, Sandoval

Contact: (415) 554-7970

Prop. F — Airport police benefits

Prop. F would impact roughly 60 officers of the San Francisco Police Department whose original contracts as airport police provided them with less benefits than SFPD officers receive. The measure would make these officers’ benefits packages equal to regular SFPD benefits.

Sponsors: Supervisors McGoldrick, Alioto-Pier, Ammiano, Dufty, Elsbernd, Jew, Maxwell, Mirkarimi, Peskin, Sandoval

Contact: (415) 554-7410

Prop. G — Golden Gate Park stables fund

In an effort to renovate the Golden Gate Park horse stables without privatizing the facility, this measure would create a fund for private donations to the renovation efforts, with city matching of $3 for every $1 donated up to $750,000. These funds would be combined with $1.2 million in state funds to renovate the stables.

Sponsors: Supervisors McGoldrick, Daly, Mirkarimi, Sandoval

Contact: (415) 554-7412

Prop. H — Parking

This measure would grant developers an absolute right — the right to create one parking space for each housing unit built in downtown San Francisco. Current law only guarantees developers one spot for every four housing units built downtown.

Support for the measure has been funded by condo developer WebCor

Prop. H would be nullified by the approval of the wider-reaching parking and transit measure, Prop. A.

Sponsor: Jim Maxwell

Contact: (415) 441-0848

Prop. I — One-stop shop for small businesses

An effort to make it easier for small businesses to comply with the many city laws governing them, this measure would provide one year trial funding of $750,000 to open an Office of Small Business under the city’s Small Business Commission to serve as a one-stop shop for the city’s small business owners.

Sponsor: Mayor Gavin Newsom

Contact: (415) 554-6640

Prop. J — Free city-wide wi-fi

This measure would approve the creation of a city-wide free wi-fi service. The service would be provided through a city agreement with a private internet service provider.

Sponsor: Mayor Gavin Newsom

Contact: (415) 554-6640

Prop. K — No more ads on public property

While not a binding mandate, if passed, this measure would declare the city’s intent not to increase the number of advertisements already on city property.

Sponsors: Supervisors McGoldrick, Daly, Mirkarimi, Peskin

Contact: (415) 554-7413

See where these groups stand:

S.F. Chamber of Commerce

Small Property Owners of San Francisco

San Francisco Small Business Network

The showing was so small, partiers were far outnumbered by police officers, who patrolled the streets by foot, bicycle and car.

“It was pretty much a success, I’d say,” said Sgt. Steve Manina, spokesman for the San Francisco Police Department. ” The city got the message out that there was going to be no planned events.”

Manina said the department made just six arrests of people who were drunk on the street and that despite anger over cancellation of the event, the few who did attend were well-behaved.

“For the most part, the small crowd that was out there was very peaceful,” Manina said. “Everything went off smoothly.”

SAN FRANCISCO — Gap Inc., a San Francisco-based apparel giant that for years has promoted itself as a socially responsible company, found itself Monday in the middle of a child labor scandal in one of its contract factories, with human rights organizations calling its claim of ignorance “disingenuous.’’

An undercover investigation released Sunday by The Observer, a London newspaper, reported children were found working in an Indian sweatshop producing blouses to be sold in Gap Kids stores in Europe and the U.S.

“As a multibillion-dollar corporation making and selling clothing in the U.S., they are fully responsible for knowing where their supply is coming from,” said Nell Greenberg, communications director at Global Exchange, a San Francisco-based organization that has for years been pressuring Gap to stop closing its U.S. factories in favor of foreign sweatshops.

North Gate News’ numerous attempts to reach Gap officials Monday were channeled to a phone number at Gap North America in New York, where the voice mailbox was full and no messages could be left.

In a statement Sunday, the company denied knowing the factory was producing clothes for Gap and referred to the factory as an “unauthorized facility.” Gap contended it did not contract with the factory — that the vendor Gap contracted to make the blouses subcontracted with this facility in direct violation of its agreement with Gap.

“It’s deeply, deeply disturbing to all of us. So, I feel violated and I feel very, very upset and angry with our vendor and with the subcontractor who made this very, very unwise decision,” said Marka Hansen, president of Gap North America, in an interview with CNN.

But Charles Kernaghan, director of the National Labor Council, said this argument illustrates how overseas outsourcing allows manufacturing giants like Gap and Wal-Mart to tout high labor standards while purchasing from subcontractors who produce cheap products under substandard labor conditions.

“It’s like talking out of two sides of your mouth. On the one hand, you’re saying we love human rights. On the other hand, you’re saying cut prices every single year,” Kernaghan said. “What do they think is going to happen? When push comes to shove, corners get cut and that means subcontracting.”

According to its website, Gap has strict policies relating to the labor standards at factories it contracts with overseas. Among them, factories are barred from the use of forced labor and from employing workers under the age of 14. According to the Observer article, a 10-year-old working at the factory in question said he and other children were sold into labor by their parents.

In recent years, Gap has touted its labor standards, issuing social responsibility report cards and vowing to improve work conditions for its employees overseas. Gap’s Product Red clothing line, introduced in 2006 and sold alongside the company’s regular merchandise, is part of a joint venture with singer Bono to raise funds to fight AIDS.

Kernaghan said Gap’s efforts to portray itself as a socially responsible company are superficial.

“Clearly, Gap’s not searching to find 10- to 13-year-old kids who are held as bonded laborers,” he said. “But Gap contracts around the world, primarily in developing countries where wages are pitifully low, and they’re there for a reason. They can pay almost nothing, and there’s not any law protecting the workers.”

Kernaghan and others said Monday they hope this case will bring to light the dangers of foreign subcontracting, but that they’re skeptical Gap will do anything meaningful to prevent future cases unless the American public reacts.

“The thing that’s paramount in this situation is that the Gap can no longer hide behind their subcontractors,” Greenberg said. “In 2007, it should be a part of the price of doing business that companies make sure the people making their product are protected.”

Kernaghan said the labor advocacy community will be pressuring Gap to make things right with the children involved in this case.

“Gap better not walk away from those kids who are held as slaves,’’ he said. “Gap better buy their freedom, send them to school and repay their families.”

The Department of Public Works secured $3 million in federal funding for a greening and street-scaping project along Divisadero Street between Haight Street and Geary Boulevard.

The department presented its proposal for how to use the funds at a community meeting held at Ida B. Wells High School on Thursday. Community input will drive the final plans for how to improve the corridor.

The proposed designs include sidewalk trees, expanded medians and sidewalks, special paving at crosswalks and new lighting options. They also include ways to help traffic flow, including a designated rush hour through-traffic lane.

“The proposals look great,” said Leela Gill, president of the North of Panhandle Neighborhood Association, in an email. “I am excited — wish they could start sooner than the Spring of ’09.”

Previous proposals presented last spring focused on a few densely commercial blocks. Residents and neighborhood groups clamored for the plan to include the whole lower Divisadero strip.

Public Works Project Manager Kris Opbroek had said that the amount of funds received — which could be between $300,000 and $3 million — would determine how many blocks could be included in the improvement project.

The department received the maximum amount and an additional $400,000 from the city of San Francisco for the project.

Residents not able to attend the meeting can still view the latest proposals and fill out a survey on the department’s website.

Designers will design a final proposal considering the community’s input. This new plan will be presented at a community meeting in mid-December or early January, Opbroek said.

Read previous Center of the City story about the project.

San Francisco’s newly established 311 call center, a one-stop shop for fielding calls from residents about a wide range of topics has been more popular than expected and is on track to exceed the call volume projected for its first year in operation.

The service was established in March to help residents get information like Muni schedules or report issues like potholes and graffiti without having to navigate through the 2,300 city administration phone numbers in order to find the right department. The call center, which expected to receive 80,000 calls a month, is now fielding closer to 200,000, on track to exceed first year call projections by over 1 million.

Mayor Gavin Newsom, who in 1999 proposed creating the service, called it “a true milestone in government efficiency,” Tuesday when he visited the call center to answer its one millionth call more than four months ahead of schedule.
“We have exceeded even our own expectations, and we plan to integrate even more city services, connecting and transforming communities, neighborhoods and businesses,” Newsom said.

The 311 number was established by the Federal Communications Commission in the 1990s to provide cities with the option to create a non-emergency city phone number to take pressure off 911 lines. San Francisco is the 41st city to put its 311 line into effect, but has opted to use the service as more than just a 911 non-emergency alternative, providing answers to almost any city-related question and ensuring accountability by monitoring if, when and how long it takes callers to get their questions answered.

With a budget of $9.8 million and a staff of 65 customer service representatives, the center reports answering over 80 percent of calls within a minute. Callers can reach a live person 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The center is equipped with a language service line to help callers in 176 languages.

As a secondary purpose, the call center could serve as a backup 911 service in the event of an emergency or natural disaster, and city officials expect the 311 number to take everyday pressure off 911, where half the calls received are non-emergency related.