Building Inspection Commission
BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)
Department of Building Inspection (DBI)
Wednesday, April 4, 2001 at 1:00 p.m.
Adopted May 2, 2001
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 408
MINUTES
The meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 1:15 p.m. by President Fillon.
1. Roll Call - Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Alfonso Fillon, President Denise D'Anne, Commissioner
Bobbie Sue Hood, Vice-President Esther Marks, Commissioner
Roy Guinnane, Commissioner Rodrigo Santos, Commissioner
Debra Walker, Commissioner
Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary
D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:
Frank Chiu, Director
Amy Lee, Assistant Director
Jim Hutchinson, Deputy Director
William Wong, Deputy Director
Tuti Suardana, Secretary
2. President's Announcements.
President Fillon stated that he had no announcements.
3. Director's Report. [Director Chiu]
a. Update on 2041 Pierce Street.
Director Chiu said that at the last Commission meeting a public member had sent a thank you letter to staff and one of the Commissioners had a question about work to be done that was mentioned in the letter. Director Chiu reported that a permit had been issued, most of the work was completed and the project was in the final stage and ready for painting.
b. Update on investigation of carport fire at Park Merced.
Director Chiu stated that on March 15th District Inspector Ed Greene responded to the request of Mr. Pender, a public member of Park Merced, and a Notice of Violation was issued asking management to respond within 30 days. Mr. Pender was not present at the meeting. Director Chiu said that the Department would follow-up to make sure a permit was applied for within the 30 days.
Ms. Pauletta Burroughs introduced herself as Vice-President of the property management company responsible for Park Merced. Ms. Burroughs stated that a contract for repairs to the carport had been awarded to Northern Sun Associates who will be pulling the permit. Ms. Burroughs said that the contract had been awarded yesterday and Northern Sun will be submitting structural drawings to the Building Department. Ms. Burroughs said that she expected the repairs to commence on the 23rd of this month. President Fillon asked if the work would be completed within 90 days. Ms. Burroughs said that as far as she knows it would be completed within the time limit.
c. Report on Employee Survey Results.
Director Chiu said that Commissioners had received a copy of an employee survey that was done by KPMG through the Controller's Office. Director Chiu stated that overall he felt that the result was very positive even though the Department still has lots of work to do. Director Chiu said that the survey shows that the employees like what they are doing and management is headed in the right direction. Director Chiu said that he would agree that there is still work to be done and did not want to go into detail unless the Commission had particular issues they wanted to discuss.
Commissioner Walker said that she wanted to address one issue that had been covered in the press and that was the issue of expediters. Commissioner Walker said that it might be something that other Commissioners wanted to address as far as the policy of dealing with this issue differently, if the Department can't seem to facilitate the expedition of projects internally. Commissioner Walker said that some municipalities have a preferred list of expediters and actually control the process by signing people up on this approved list and then monitoring who is doing what to make sure that people are getting serviced. Commissioner Walker said that she gets calls from contractors who do not want to have to hire expediters, but have trouble getting projects through and this is one of those things that is sort of substantiated by the employee survey. Commissioner Walker said she thought this is something that the Commission should look at in the future. President Fillon asked to what part of the survey Commissioner Walker was referring. Commissioner Walker said that she was referring to the part where employees have been pressured to deal with expediters or seeing that expediters get special treatment through the process. President Fillon asked if there were some specific questions on the survey that referred to this. Commissioner D'Anne said that question #68 was an example and stated that she was also interested in the expediter issue. Commissioner Walker said that there were several questions that were related. Commissioner Walker said that it was not a majority, but was substantial enough to be an issue.
Assistant Director Amy Lee stated that the Controller's Office is not finished with their audit of the Department and one of their primary focuses is looking at the expediter's role at DBI. Ms. Lee stated that a survey was also done with contractors, expediters and the clients that use DBI's services and those results are in. Ms. Lee said that the Commission might want to wait until the completion of the Controller's audit, which should be done by April or May. Commissioner Walker thanked Ms. Lee. Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to make a correction, in that question #68 states that if someone answered yes to question #67, which is a question about an expediter hired by a customer asking an employee for improper preferential treatment; and then #68 says that if yes was answered to #67 has an employee ever witnessed an expediter receiving improper preferential treatment and there 67% said yes, so Vice-President Hood said this was a majority of a minority. Commissioner Walker said that she understood that, but it is still a significant number and is still a concern. Commissioner Walker said that people should be able to equally move projects through the Department and if this is not being done than changes need to be made.
Vice-President Hood said that she thought that question #72 was interesting and asked who wrote the questions. Director Chiu said that the Controller's Office and KPMG wrote the questions. Assistant Director Lee said that KPMG did not do that portion of the survey, but Director Chiu and the Controller's Office had asked her to interview and survey staff and this was perfect timing for the Department to work with the Controller's Office to come up with the questions. Ms. Lee said that she wanted to comment on the question of preferential treatment. Ms. Lee stated that the Department had difficulty drafting this question as DBI was looking to see what the expediter's role is and to make sure that nothing inappropriate was happening. Ms. Lee said that at the same time what some people may perceive as preferential treatment might just be management following up with a particular problem. For instance, if there is an issue that is brought to the Commission's attention and Ms. Lee goes back to her office to investigate and find out what is going on she will go and talk with staff and might ask a staff member to do an inspection that very day. Ms. Lee said that other staff members not knowing that the situation is a BIC inquiry might perceive that as her giving preferential treatment to the customer and not just a follow-up on a complaint. Ms. Lee said that this was a very difficult question to draft.
Vice-President Hood said Ms. Lee did a great job. Vice-President Hood said that one of the questions she was interested in was a question that deals with one of the goals of the Commission that is to have very good customer service. Vice-President Hood referred to question #72 where it stated that DBI has placed too much emphasis on customer service. Vice-President Hood said that 20% of those surveyed strongly agreed and 23% agreed; a majority still disagreed, but a significant 43% thought that there was too much customer service. Vice-President Hood said she would like to find out more about that. Director Chiu said that he did not think that this question was appropriate because since this Department was created one of the things the Commission and the Department has worked hard on has been to respond to customer's needs. Director Chiu said that customers could be tenants that are trying to remedy problems in units, someone who is applying for a permit and want that permit expedited, someone who is seeking inspection for permitted work and so forth. Director Chiu said that DBI's definition of customer service is anybody that calls or walks into the building and asks for help. Director Chiu said that one of the comments he got from the Controller's Office is that they did not think that DBI should be so concerned about customer service given that DBI is an enforcement agency. Vice-President Hood said that it is strange that this question is a negative question. Director Chiu said that the Controller's Office could not understand why an enforcement agency could be so focused on customer service. Director Chiu said that the Supervisors and the Mayor's Office are making sure that every City department has a customer service plan to address customer's needs. Ms. Lee said that the question is awkward, but the Department can address this in response to the Controller's Office once the results come out in May. Ms. Lee said that one of the things the Controller's Office is finding out is that DBI may have, ironically, too good of a customer service element in the Department and are saying that it may contradict that the Department is an enforcement agency. Commissioner Walker said it would depend what the Controller's Office is defining as customer service. Ms. Lee said that sometimes the Department gets caught in the middle when there are two neighbors fighting about property and the Department has to respond to both; it is difficult to enforce one versus the other and there are a lot of issues. Sometimes even though the Department is trying to make everyone happy, the Department is always drawn into the mix even if it is not DBI's jurisdiction. Ms. Lee said there are a lot of dynamics going on that the Department will look into once the results of the report are received; the audit can be responded to and issues that the Department agrees or disagrees with can be settled.
Commissioner D'Anne said that she would have hoped to get a copy of the survey sooner than she did as it was very comprehensive and she wanted more time to look at it carefully. Commissioner D'Anne said that she was concerned about the expediters and talk about political favoritism and preferential treatment. Commissioner D'Anne said that on the expediter issue it seemed sort of discriminatory because there are people who cannot afford to hire these expediters. Commissioner D'Anne said that this was basically discrimination and the Department needs to do something about it. Commissioner D'Anne stated that she knew there was nothing that the Department could do about expediters, but their function could be made less important if everyone was given better service equally. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the Commission was going to try to do something about political favoritism within the Department that was mentioned a couple of times, and the preferential treatment within the Department itself, as well as with customers. Commissioner D'Anne said that there was question #31 that asked if an employee held a building, plumbing, electrical or mechanical certificate and said she wanted to know if the City required these inspectors who are plumbers, electricians etc., to be certified. Commissioner D'Anne said she also wanted to address the issue of parking, question #55. Commissioner D'Anne said she would like to know how many parking spots the Department has overall, how many are leased, how many are for visitors, how many are for staff and how many are for BIC business vehicles. Commissioner D'Anne said that there are some employees who feel that they should have parking and said that the shuttle service is great, but wondered if the Department was pushing the commuter check service. Assistant Director Lee said that the commuter check service has been implemented and commuter checks are available for DBI staff as well as for City Planning. Ms. Lee said that employees come to the Administration and Finance Department to get the commuter checks. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the Department was advertising this service. Ms. Lee said that it is in the bulletins and newsletters and all employees should be aware of the service. Commissioner D'Anne referred to question #64 asking if employees had witnessed customers receiving improper preferential treatment and said she wanted to know if the Department has identified who is getting this preferential treatment, as someone has to be responsible for this. Ms. Lee said that this survey was sent out to all 275 staff members and was based without a name so that people could answer honestly. Ms. Lee said that certainly the Department would look into problem areas if the audit finds that this is a wide spread problem, but Ms. Lee said that it would be difficult for her to go back to 21 people, as she does not know who wrote the comments, and to follow-up on each item. Ms. Lee said that there are certain things that can be looked into in a general way, but there are other things that she will not be able to follow-up on. Commissioner D'Anne said that question #77 asked if the employee considered the number of inspections that they performed too high or too low. Commissioner D'Anne asked who makes the determination of how many inspections are done and has anybody actually measured the time each inspection takes to get some kind of an average. Ms. Lee said that the number of inspections are set by the Management by Objective goals and were set by the Directors and Deputy Directors after looking into how long an inspection takes; some inspections will not take very long. Ms. Lee said that there may be a delay on an inspection because the inspector cannot get into the property, or there is an inspection that will take all afternoon because of a large property and there may be five inspections that only take five minutes each. Ms. Lee said that there was a time study done in prior years and that was how nine inspections per day was arrived at; the number was not just made up, but determined from research. Ms. Lee said that the Department is trying to push for more inspections per day as some inspections are easier than others, but a significant amount of research was done before creating this number for inspections. Ms. Lee said that this was also a number that was agreed upon by the unions and was not a number that management imposed on staff without union input. Commissioner D'Anne said that there was another question about employees having too much or too little work and said that, having been a supervisor herself, people can appear to be doing a lot of work and are not really doing anything. Commissioner D'Anne said that she actually did the jobs herself to find out what was involved in a position. Commissioner D'Anne said she wanted to know if people who supervise staff actually perform these duties so they get an idea about how long a task takes and if more or less people are needed. Ms. Lee said absolutely, the Department has monthly management meetings and Ms. Lee said that she meets with her managers every two weeks. Ms. Lee said that most of the managers come from the line staff and have been promoted upwards so they know how to do the duties. Ms. Lee said that, for example since this was not the case with her, she went to her staff and now knows how to pull a 3-R report even though she would not do this in her daily duties, but wanted to understand the jobs of those employees who report to her. Ms. Lee said that some people do have an easy job and light work loads, but other people have very heavy workloads and do not complain. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the Department is able to give other tasks to those people who have light workloads. Ms. Lee said yes, for example Customer Service people sit in the front and answer phones all day, but that is not their primary responsibility; on the sixth floor there is a girl sitting at the front desk answering phones, but she does data input and helps other divisions. Ms. Lee said that the electrical division has been a little bit behind in data entry so the person sitting at that desk helps and also helps with large mailings for the Commission. Ms. Lee said that everyone pitches in and DBI employees have been very good about having a teamwork spirit. Commissioner D'Anne said that she is asking these questions and hopes that she can get reports especially on the preferential treatment question and political favoritism, as this needs to be eliminated. Commissioner D'Anne said that it needs to be determined where it is coming from and what can be done about it. Ms. Lee stated that sometimes people define political favoritism in different ways; for example, someone who supported Mayor Brown sees someone from Supervisor Ammiano's side getting support and they will holler political favoritism and vice versa and it is really important to discern what is reality and what is not. Ms. Lee said that San Francisco is a very small City and it is political in its nature and every department is not protected from such activism. Ms. Lee said that when the Department has a vacancy letters from all different groups would be received. Ms. Lee said politicalism is seen as negative, but sometimes it is not it's a positive thing; it is community input and the Department cannot ignore this. President Fillon said that he wanted to address this issue as far as his experience on the Commission. President Fillon said that one thing the Commission has tried to do every year in setting performance goals is that the Commission cannot prevent people from hiring an expediter, but can make sure that someone who doesn't have an expediter is helped through the process. In the past years focus has been put on the premise that anyone who walks through the door at DBI gets their permit processed in a certain amount of time whether or not they have an expediter. President Fillon said that if there is favoritism going on the Commission has to do whatever it can to stop that, but it is very hard. President Fillon said that the Commission has not ignored this issue, but has tried to make sure that things are fair across the board. Ms. Lee said that she thought the Commission along with the Director has done an excellent job in doing that by providing brochures and checklists to help the person who is a first time permit applicant to make them aware of the system and with the new Pathfinder unit everyone has a fair shot at trying to get service. President Fillon said that in regard to the performance criteria that the Commission has set with the Director, the Director has performed in the excellent range consistently over the past several years.
Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to point out that when someone looks at a survey they tend to look for the things that are wrong. Vice-President Hood said that in looking at some of the questions she sees what an excellent report card this is for the Department. Vice-President Hood referred to question #11 and said that this is civil service, and 81% of people said that overall they are satisfied with their jobs and this is very high for any organization. Vice-President Hood said that 78% of people said that their productivity had increased over the past year. Ms. Lee said that the negative percentage came from the replies of only 21 employees, but the responses Vice-President Hood was referring to came from 132 people. Vice-President Hood said that 85% of staff replied favorably to the overall quality of their work unit and 90% of staff responded favorably to the question about management's high standards and expectations for high quality work. Vice-President Hood said that she thought this was a wonderful indicator in a situation where employees cannot be moved from one job to another at will and where the Department has to keep up the spirit of staff. Ms. Lee said that the Department does not have the advantage of giving incentives such as financial bonuses. Vice-President Hood said that in City departments that she interacts with DBI is one of the best ones and said that the Commission should not lose sight of this. Ms. Lee said that the average staff time in the Department is between eight to ten years and people would not stay if they are miserable as they have a choice to leave departments all the time. Ms. Lee said that she would encourage the Commission to wait for the entire audit to be complete and then the Department would be happy to follow-up on concerns.
d. Update on the progress of original design professional of a project to perform special inspections as required by the Department.
Director Chiu said that this was an item to follow-up on the request of Commissioner Guinnane to require that special inspections be performed by the original design professional. Director Chiu said that Deputy Director William Wong has been trying to work with the City Attorney's Office to find out exactly what the Department needs to do and as of today, the Department does not have a resolution. Director Chiu said that Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian and William Wong have been talking about what the Department can do legally and the Department wants to continue to work with the City Attorney's Office to come up with a policy. Director Chiu said that he did not have any draft and wanted to make sure that legally the Department is okay before any policy is issued. Director Chiu said that once a draft policy is issued he would present it to the Commission for action at a future date. Commissioner Guinnane asked when that would be. Director Chiu said that he would try to calendar this for the next meeting. Commissioner Guinnane asked what the response was from the City Attorney's Office as to the legality of enforcing this issue and asked what were the problems. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that one problem was with trying to force some property owner to hire a particular individual. Commissioner Guinnane said that what he is after is that it would not really be forcing the property owner, but the actual designer was hired by the property owner in the first place who obviously had confidence in the designer to design their building. Commissioner Guinnane said that his concern is that they designed the building and know the building better than an outside engineer and said he would be more comfortable in having that same designer sign off on the building. Ms. Boyajian said that she understood what Commissioner Guinnane was saying, but sometimes there is a falling out between the design professional and the property owner over fees or whatever and the property owner may not want to hire that person or the design professional might not want to perform further services. Ms. Boyajian said an instance would be where the design professional did not get paid for his or her services. Ms. Boyajian said that the Department could say that this is a preference, but two people could not be forced to contract together if they don't want to and that is her legal issue. Commissioner Walker asked if currently the two things can happen by whomever the property owner hires and there is no requirement currently that it has to be a separate unassociated design professional. Vice-President Hood said that in some instances this might be a way of making people more responsible, but there are some situations in which an owner can perceive that one company has done the design and they would rather have an independent testing association do the final inspection. Vice-President Hood said that this is often split up or doubled up in large projects because sometimes the owner wants a different local person to do the inspections as a second check. Vice-President Hood said that she thought the idea of making the designer more responsible is a good one and said that there are other people, such as architects that are pursuing this same idea. Vice-President Hood said that the designer wanted to ensure that what has been drawn was what was actually built. Vice-President Hood said that architects would like to be there as owners are often trying to squirm out of it to save money, but the owners often don't want them to be there so it is a very, very complex problem. Commissioner Marks said that it seems that it should be possible at the time the designer submits the plan, and that is the basis of the project being approved, have something in there about the expectation that by the same token that the designer prepares the plans that are approved they should be required to check to make sure that the plans have been complied with and if they are not able to because of a falling out or whatever, have a provision where at the end of the project an explanation could be made where there are situations where they are not able to do it. Commissioner Marks said that this seems pretty straightforward to her. Vice-President Hood said that an example of this that is already done is for soils reports; the soils engineer has to then review the drawing and write a letter to the City saying that this structure and foundation design is in compliance with their recommendations in the soils report and then when excavations are being done, the soils engineer has to be called out to the jobsite and say, yes, this footing can be put here because it meets all of the criteria of the soils report. Vice-President Hood said that this is an ongoing pattern, but the owner still has the right to switch if there is a problem. Commissioner Marks said that there should be a provision to explain that, but the typical pattern or expectation should be that the designer is the one that has to sign off on the property. Vice-President Hood said that what architects do is verify that the property was essentially constructed in conformance with the general intent of the drawings and there should be some other similar thing for structural engineers. Vice-President Hood said that maybe it is something that needs more study as she understands that there are legal and political issues involved in this. Vice-President Hood said that as soon as something such as this is put out, there will be half a dozen professional groups jumping in and saying no and half a dozen jumping in and saying yes. Director Chiu said that the Department would like to work with the design professionals involved and start a dialog with them to see what they think and bring it back to the Commission. Director Chiu said that the Department could invite all of the design professionals and have a meeting about what the Department is thinking of doing and Commissioner Guinnane could attend to give his input before putting anything in a draft form. Director Chiu said he would work with Commissioner Guinnane on setting this up.
e. Update on fees paid by non-profit organizations.
Director Chiu said that at the last meeting some of the Commissioners felt that non-profit organizations or other organizations were exempt from fees for permit fees, school fees or TIDF fees. Director Chiu said that he did not think that any fees were waived and asked Assistant Director Amy Lee to look into this. Director Chiu said that definitely the Department does not waive any permit fees and it is not the Department's responsibility to waive school or TIDF fees. Director Chiu said he wanted to explain how the Department is involved with Transit Impact Fees and School Fees. The Department's role is very limited. Director Chiu said that when a project is submitted to DBI the plan checker goes over the plans and determines how many square feet are based on residential or commercial, etc. and then that form that is filled out by the plan checker is forward to the school district. Director Chiu said that DBI's role for school fees stops at that point, as the Department does not collect those fees. The same is true for TIDF fees as the information is forwarded to Muni for transit impact fees. Director Chiu said that if these organizations waive a fee, that is there prerogative, but DBI does not waive any fees for any organization. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that for the Planning Code, they allow some of the non-profits to pay fees later in the process than other project sponsors as they get their funding when the permits are approved, but they still have to pay them.
f. Report on four-year projection of income.
Director Chiu said that the Department prepared a report for the Commission showing the worst case scenario for the Department if the economy was to head south. Director Chiu said that he had asked Amy Lee and Taras Madison to prepare the report showing trends going down for four-years. Assistant Director Amy Lee said that the report was prepared by Taras Madison, but she would speak about it briefly and answer any questions. Ms. Lee said that first of all, the Department has a deferred revenue account that is for fees that the Department has yet not earned. Ms. Lee said that according to general accounting practices the Department cannot use or keep fees that have not been earned in that fiscal year and to date the Department has about $10M in that account. Ms. Lee said that this means that in the next year or two the Department will have earned those fees and those funds can be moved into the operating account. Ms. Lee said that the Department also has an additional $2M in a surplus account and those fees are earned and are a surplus that can be used whenever the Commission and the Board of Supervisors gives their okay. Ms. Lee stated that in terms of the revenue projections, it is very difficult to do a five or four year projection, but two different scenarios were done; one using the average of the past four years and averaging that out and projecting those amount of revenues for the next four years. Ms. Lee said that another scenario was done by using the past seven years, which is a little more realistic because it captures some of the downtime for the Department. Ms. Lee stated that the past four years have been very good to DBI and if that figure it used, higher revenues for the next four years will be projected. Ms. Lee said that in looking at the seven year projection, the Department will still be collecting revenue as there are a lot of projects in the pipeline and no decreases are projected even for next year, but assuming that there is some slight decrease, at the worst case scenario if the economy tends to plunge for the next five years and the Department sees no end in sight, the Department will be looking at revenues a little bit under $20M using the seven-year average. Ms. Lee said that DBI has been very good about spending its money wisely and for the past two or three years the Department has been planning for the downtime. Ms. Lee said that as she gets pressure from the Mayor's Office and the Board of Supervisors to spend the money in the Department's surplus account she keeps telling them not to make her spend it, as there are no guarantees in a downtime. Ms. Lee said that to that end, the Department has used temporary salaries for the past two years, which has not been done in the past; this would mean that if there is a downtime there would not be a lot of permanent personnel losing jobs. Ms. Lee stated that even in a worst-case scenario she did not think that the Department would have to lay people off. Ms. Lee said that in this years budget, as well as the budget that was just recently approved, most of the expenditures, at least $4M have been one-time costs. Ms. Lee said that if expenses needed to be cut down by next year, this could be done without any problem; the Department would just not have new cars or purchase things that would not be needed in a tight budget time. Ms. Lee said that the Department is trying to control expenditures as well as keeping track of revenue. Commissioner Guinnane asked what would be applied to the surplus after the $10M+ that has come in as unearned fees was transferred to the operating budget. Ms. Lee said that on the average it has been $3M that the Department has been earning so probably next year the Department would have earned $3M of the $10M, so thereafter there would be $7M in the unearned account and then $3M + $2M or $5M in the surplus. Ms. Lee said that the Department has not had to touch the surplus as there are revenues from the operating expenses. Commissioner Guinnane asked if Ms. Lee was talking about $12M. Ms. Lee said that the Department would still have the $12M available, but now $7M would be unearned and could not be touched, but the Department could start playing with the $5M if needed. Ms. Lee said that all of this money was earning interest so the Department is still receiving more than $1M from all of the accounts because the Department has its operating accounts and operating revenues that are still very strong. Ms. Lee said that DBI has not had to touch its savings. Commissioner Guinnane said asked if Ms. Lee would be able to get a handle on this time to date versus last year and if there is any way to get on handle on the actual permits being filed based on the job costs. Ms. Lee said that this is what is being used for the projection for 2001/2002 as this is based on the past months and the same time activity. Ms. Lee said that the Department has not increased any of its revenues and the increase for next year is solely attributed to Mission Bay; it is not attributed to any type of increase in activity whatsoever. Commissioner Guinnane asked if the Department had the same volume of permit activity as it had a year ago today. Ms. Lee answered no, the number is higher. Commissioner Guinnane asked if this were true for the month of April, April 2001 versus April 2000. Commissioner Guinnane asked if there was any big fluctuation. Ms. Lee said that the numbers are still higher. Director Chiu said that for some reason people are still trying to apply for permits to catch the tail end of the rise in the economy and the Department is still seeing an increase. Commissioner Guinnane said that there were a number of lofts built last year and the two previous years and now there is a moratorium on lofts and thought that there would be a big drop in permit applications. Ms. Lee said that the lofts do not comprise a lot of the Department's revenues. Ms. Lee said that another reason for the high numbers is that the City has had unusually good weather this year, as opposed to last year when there was a very heavy rainy season. Ms. Lee said that usually the first six months have been really great for the Department as there has not really been a rainy season.
Commissioner Walker asked if the amount of money in the reserve was handled by the Treasurer or does the Department handle it. Ms. Lee said that it is handled by the Controller's Office and the Treasurer and they bank it and in order for the Department to spend it, the Commission, the Board of Supervisors and the Controller's Office would all have to approve the expenditures. Commissioner Guinnane asked if the generated income comes to the Department. Ms. Lee said that the interest comes to the Department. Commissioner Santos said that regarding the worst-case scenario, has the need for the expansion of 1660 Mission Street been figured into the equation. Ms. Lee said that right now the Department is trying to move forward with the expansion, but it is not happening anytime soon. Ms. Lee said that as she stated before the Department does not anticipate any layoffs so staff still need to be housed. Ms. Lee said that right now it is not as pressing for the Department to expand 1660 and certainly the stress of that is not around, but maybe in three or four years, or four or five before it gets built at this rate; the ball is still up in the air with that project. Commissioner Santos asked if the Department were progressing with this project. Ms. Lee said that the Department is trying to progress with it to the extent that it can, but it is not a top priority. Commissioner Walker said that it would be great to continue to dialog with all parties to agree with what it should be so when the time comes the Department will not have to deal with this in a stress mode. Commissioner Walker asked if Director Chiu had been meeting with the parties interested in the expansion. Director Chiu said that DPW has denied the Planning Association's request to occupy their property so he has sent a memo to the Union and Steve Young to continue a dialogue to see what could be done within DBI's property. Director Chiu said that he hoped the dialogue would continue and said that he wanted to clarify that it is not the Department's goal to lay people off, but by attrition, if someone retires or resigns, management will review the workload and determine if vacated positions need to be filled. President Fillon thanked Assistant Director Lee for her report.
4. Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.
Mr. Steve Williams said that he was present on behalf of certain residents of Cow Hollow and Pacific Heights regarding a specific property, 2838 Sacramento Street and specifically the illegal demolition that has occurred on that sight. Mr. Williams said that he was aware of the Commission's special hearing that is scheduled to address the issue of illegal demolitions and said that perhaps this property will be brought up at that time. Mr. Williams said that in the interim he wanted to ask for the assistance of the Commission regarding this particular property because his group has been unable to get a response out of the Department despite a meeting six weeks ago and a letter from him some three weeks ago. Mr. Williams said that he had sent copies of the letter to the Commission and also had copies available. Mr. Williams stated that he could not get enforcement of Section 103.3.3 even under the extremely limited circumstances of interpretation given by the Director and the City Attorney. Mr. Williams said that the Commission were probably aware that the interpretation given by the Department through the City Attorney's Office indicates that even if a building is completely demolished if there are permits, alteration permits, which show the extent of the demolition and work to be done, then it is not a demolition even if it is way over the threshold of two-thirds. Mr. Williams said that his group thinks that this is a wrong interpretation, counter intuitive, counter logical. Mr. Williams said that in this instance it has already been established that although there were alteration permits for the site, the scope of the work, the scope of the demolition, has exceeded those permits. Mr. Williams said that he has asked for a Director's hearing to be set and there has been no response. Commissioner Guinnane asked what was the date of the hearing with staff and who was in attendance. Mr. Williams said that the meeting was on March 2nd with Director Chiu and Deputy Director Wong. Mr. Williams said that several members of the community were there including representatives of the Cow Hollow Neighborhood Association and Pacific Residents Association and other folks that have been concerned about these illegal demolitions for years. Mr. Williams stated that there is a spade of them right now in Pacific Heights and Cow Hollow. Commissioner Guinnane asked what was supposed to happen at the end of the meeting and was the Department supposed to get back to the group. Mr. Williams said that he confirmed in his letter that the heads of the Department confirmed to the group at the meeting that indeed under their definition, which is an extremely limited definition, if they found that the destruction of the house at the sight exceeded the permits that would fall under their definition of an illegal demolition they may set a Director's hearing. Mr. Williams said that this was requested at the meeting when they showed photographs of a façade and a part of a wall still left. Mr. Williams said he followed this up with a letter, but the real complaint is that there is an air of complicity within the Department because it is the same folks over and over that are demolishing these houses. Mr. Williams said that 2838 Sacramento is a perfect example as it is Jimmy Jen and Delta Design, someone who is infamous for this very sort of act and the Department refuses to enforce the laws that are on the books. Mr. Williams said that he was present to urge the Commission to have the Director act, set a hearing and get an action item going to move on this particular project as an example that is well known now City-wide and would make a perfect example to draw the line for the illegal demolitions. Commissioner Walker asked Director Chiu to comment. Director Chiu said that he did not know that he and Deputy Director Wong were supposed to do anything after the meeting, as the meeting was just talking about unlawful demolition and the policy and process in general. Director Chiu said that what they did tell the participants at that meeting was that, as everyone knows, the Department is having an Unlawful Demolition Task Force with the Commissioners. Director Chiu said that these members of the public were told that they could address their concerns at that time. Director Chiu said that he does not believe that the Department owes any follow-up and was not aware that anything had to be done after the meeting. Director Chiu said that he did receive a letter a couple of weeks ago and has responded to the letter. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian confirmed that she has received a copy of the letter that was sent to this public member so he did not know what Mr. Williams was talking about. Commissioner Walker asked if Mr. Williams had a copy of the letter. Mr. Williams said that he had not received any letter, but would like to get a copy of it. Director Chiu said that if Mr. Williams did not receive a copy he would find out what happened to it as he remembered signing the letter after talking to staff and Ms. Boyajian. Commissioner Walker asked if an action to hold a Director's hearing was appropriate to look at this issue. President Fillon said that this was not an agendized item. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that the Commission could ask questions, but if there were going to be an extended debate about this subject, it would have to be on an agenda. Commissioner Walker said she just wanted to ask if it were appropriate to allow the public a Director's hearing on this issue. Mr. Williams asked what Director Chiu's letter said regarding their request for a hearing. Director Chiu said that his letter said negative as to a hearing. Director Chiu said that he did not have the letter in front of him, but would be happy to discuss this at a future meeting. Commissioner Walker said that she would like this on the next agenda. President Fillon said that it would have to be on the agenda to discuss this further. Commissioner Walker asked what was the current status of the project and was the project going forward. Deputy Director Hutchinson said that he had Wing Lau, Chief Building Inspector meet with the Mr. Berke and the adjoining neighbors of the property and are working on a resolution to the problem; the job has been stopped. Mr. Hutchinson said that he and Wing Lau also met with Larry Badiner and Neil Hart as far as making a decision to stop the work and right now the project is stopped. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department did look at the concerns and have met with other parties and stated that he has made a response to Mr. Williams' letter point by point. Mr. Hutchinson said that he apologized to Mr. Williams if he did not get a copy of the letter, but will make sure that it is faxed to him after today's meeting if he could impose on him for a business card. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the entire Commission could have a copy of the letter.
Ms. Anastasia Yovanopoulos said that the first time she came to the Commission was to complain about the heating in her apartment because it was cold and said that it is still cold in her apartment and her doctor tells her not to use the heat. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that she is glad that Lesley Stansfield has a Housing Inspector that is helping her with the problem and also that Mr. Hutchinson met with her regarding the problem of the fumes from the incomplete combustion of the carburetor of the car parked in the garage that enters her living space via the duct work for the heating. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that this has caused her a lot of distress and illness and said that this is an update of when she last spoke to the Commission about this situation on February 2, 2000. Ms. Yovanopoulos stated that there is an outstanding Code Violation #200003699 that was issued when Ms. Stansfield came out in response to her call and the Fire Dispatch was there as well and Ms. Stansfield got to speak to the owner and take a look around at the locked storerooms. Ms. Yovanopoulos stated that she was glad that progress was being made and hoped that this situation gets cleared up so that she has heat that meets the code requirements.
5. Discussion and possible action to place hiring freeze on Housing Inspector positions.
President Fillon asked who was presenting this issue. Commissioner Guinnane said that for the last year he has been talking about the Housing Division and problems in the Housing Division. Commissioner Guinnane said that he has been concerned about a lot of the Inspectors that have been hired from the Public Health sector and coming over to the Housing Division with no, as far as he is concerned, qualifications or skills to do a lot of the inspections on the outside. Commissioner Guinnane stated that he wanted to put a freeze on hiring, temporarily, until the Department can set up some kind of training for the Inspectors in the Housing Division so they can be certified the same as the Building Inspectors and take classes and go out and make proper inspections. Commissioner Guinnane said that he talked to all of the Housing Inspectors yesterday and the Division has no problem with training, and are all for it. Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not know what the problem was and said that the Commission needed to come up with a plan and implement it immediately for the Housing Division, but in the meantime he wanted to put a freeze on hiring any inspectors in that Division. Commissioner Guinnane said that in talking to Mr. Hutchinson, he was under the assumption that when the Inspectors go out that they inspect the buildings and the Fire Inspectors were inspecting the fire escapes, but the Fire Department were not inspecting them at all, so nobody was inspecting the fire escapes. Commissioner Guinnane said that now Mr. Hutchinson has implemented a new part of the inspection for Housing inspectors that they also inspect fire escapes and balconies, drop the ladders and see that they are functioning properly. Commissioner Guinnane said that this is another item that will need to be looked at by the Housing Division as part of their inspection to make sure that they are qualified to do that. Commissioner Guinnane said that furthermore the Inspectors will need to look at the actual structure itself, the bolts, the bolting on the walls, the I-beams coming out to make sure that everything is in order. President Fillon asked if there was any further discussion by the Commissioners. Commissioner Walker said that she was concerned about housing issues and said that the Commission has talked about having a hearing to get input from the public on this issue and to hear from the unions. Commissioner Walker said that she was a little concerned about the Commission getting involved in what seems to be staff issues and said that this seems to be beyond the jurisdiction of the Commissioners. Commissioner Walker said that she thought that in dealing with this the Commissioners have to remember that their job is to set policy, non-personnel policy, around departmental procedures and the Commissions only personnel focus can be the Director. Commissioner Walker said that she certainly would support looking at how management is responding or not to inspections and if there is a need to deal with either the qualifications of the Housing Inspectors or making sure that they have the training for what the requirements are and further definition of who is supposed to be doing what out there in the field, but said that she is reluctant to support or not support a hiring freeze. Commissioner Walker said that she almost thinks that unless it is across the board for budgetary reasons, she did not believe the Commission could ask for a freeze. Commissioner Marks said that she does not feel there is a need for another public hearing on this issue as it has been brought up several times already. Commissioner Marks said that the first time Ron Dicks was present representing Local 21 and stated at the time that he would think that they would be very amenable to get additional training to enable them to do their job better. Commissioner Marks said that she brought this up at budget time because there was no allocation for training. Commissioner Marks said that there was a agreement that there would be a meeting with the Housing Inspectors to try and identify areas where they did need additional training. Commissioner Marks said she thought that Commissioner Guinnane has done this so from what he has reported Commissioner Marks said that she agreed that it would be wise for the Commission to recommend that there not be any more hires until all of the staff are in a position, through the additional training, to do the work that the Department is responsible for. Commissioner Walker said that she thought this was a management issue to define the criteria and provide the training. Commissioner Marks stated that she thought it was part of the Commission's responsibility to give that direction and oversight. Commissioner Walker said that this issue is about not hiring until the definition is changed and the Commission has not even agreed that it should happen. Commissioner Marks said that to her it is not a matter of the definition; it is a matter that the Housing Inspectors are in agreement that they would like additional training. Commissioner Walker said that this was about modifying the qualifications for the Housing Inspectors. Commissioner Marks said that the other part is about having the requirements changed and said that is a separate issue, but said that she thought that Commissioner Guinnane was saying that there should be a freeze until this is settled. Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to put the freeze on until the classification can be changed and get some kind of program in place for training these employees so when they go out there they know what they are looking at. Commissioner Walker said that she did not think that the Commission could do this. Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought the Commission could as he has discussed this for a year and it takes a death or somebody to fall off a deck that is completely rotten for it to come to the attention of this Commission. Commissioner Guinnane said that the Inspectors have gone out and looked at buildings, and a prime example is the one over on Clipper Street that he keeps bringing up. Commissioner Walker said that she would like to get an assessment from the Commission's Attorney as to what the Commission can do. Commissioner Guinnane said that he believes that there is no competent management in the Housing Division. Commissioner Walker said that is a whole other issue. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that she thought Commissioner Walker was correct that the Commission cannot impose the hiring freeze, but the Commission can certainly urge the Director, but the Commission cannot directly interfere with having the Department put a freeze on hiring Housing Inspectors. Vice-President Hood said that as she understands it there is very strong commitment from the labor union and a number of voices on the Commission supporting to have the Housing Inspectors qualified with the same ICBO certification that Building Inspectors have and Vice-President Hood said that she would strongly support that. Vice-President Hood said that this is something that should happen right away and if the Housing Inspectors are willing to do this the Department should find the funds for them to do it and it should be proceeded with as soon as possible because the Commission has found many instances where these Inspectors are the first people who could discover something really dangerous and they need to be able to recognize what they are seeing. Vice-President Hood said that she would like to make a motion that the Commission urge the Director to implement the training program for Housing Inspectors that would include the inspection of fire escapes and certification as a Building Inspector; secondly, Vice-President Hood said that she would like to make a motion that the Commission move that the Director begin with all due haste to implement a change of classification with the HRC to include this additional certification. President Fillon said that this item is only dealing with placing a hiring freeze on Housing Inspector positions and that is the only action that can be taken. Ms. Boyajian said that the Commission could urge the Director to forego the hiring until this item can be agendized to include those two motions that Vice-President Hood just made. Vice-President Hood said that she would like this to be on the next calendar and in the meantime the Commission should urge the Director not to hire anymore Housing Inspectors until the these issues can be resolved. Commissioner Walker said that she would like the Secretary to notify the unions, as the Commission is talking about them going along with this and said that she is not hearing from the Unions. Commissioner Walker said that she wanted to make sure that people are notified so that people know what is going on. President Fillon said that maybe the Commission should not take official action, but should urge the Director not to hire and keep it at that level until the qualifications are resolved. President Fillon said that this would not be binding in any way, but would be a statement that as a Commission they feel that new hiring should be put off until the qualifications are firmly established and agreed upon by all parties. President Fillon said that he did not think it was appropriate for the Commission to take the action of placing a freeze on hiring. Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to get an opinion from the City Attorney to see what control the Commission does have. Commissioner Guinnane said he believes that the Commission has this control. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that the Commission has control over the Director in that the Commission can fire him and discipline him and give him objectives and goals, but the Commission cannot leap over him and directly manage the Department in this way that it is phrased on the agenda. Ms. Boyajian said that the Commission could urge the Director and said that the Director hears the Commission and she assumes that he would take the Commission's direction. Vice-President Hood said that her motion was to urge the Director to do so which is basically the same thing that the President said. President Fillon said that there did not need to be a motion to do that, but the Commission could say that they are all in agreement to urge the Director to do that. Commissioner Walker stated that she thought the Commission had talked about this enough and the Director has heard it and everybody agrees that this issue needs to be resolved, but said that she did not think it was agendized in a way that the Commission could take action and doesn't think that the Commission has decided what that precise action is. Vice-President Hood said that she made a motion and asked if there was a second. Commissioner Guinnane said that he would second the motion. Commissioner Walker said that it was not on the agenda. Vice-President Hood said that the motion is as it says on the agenda, discussion and possible action to place hiring freeze on Housing Inspector positions. Vice-President Hood said that her motion is to urge the Director to not hire further Housing Inspectors until the Commission has dealt with some of the issues that have been brought up. President Fillon said that the Commission is not placing a hiring freeze. Vice-President Hood said that Ms. Boyajian nodded her head that the motion meets the agenda. Vice-President Hood said that there was a motion made and seconded and she wanted it voted on. Ms. Boyajian said the motion is within the scope of the item. President Fillon asked if there was any discussion on the motion. Commissioner Walker asked if the motion could be amended to say that unless the not hiring puts something at risk. President Fillon said that Vice-President Hood made the motion and it would be up to her to accept an amendment. Vice-President Hood said that she would not accept that amendment as she thinks that the issue will be solved quickly and the Commission does not need to be worried about this. Commissioner Walker said if something happens as a result of this she did not want to be on the hook for it. Director Chiu said that the Department and Management hears loud and clear the concerns of the Commissioner about the minimum qualifications. Director Chiu said that with item #5 there is a letter showing that the Department has begun to work with DHR to change the classification. Director Chiu said that the list that currently exists for Housing Inspectors would not expire until December 2001 leaving eight more months to go. Director Chiu said that in the meantime the Housing Division has a couple of vacancies and the Commission has urged him and the Department to find a way to deal with some of the Housing issues and Director Chiu said he did plan on hiring some more people. Director Chiu stated that he want to give the Commission assurance, even though he was not going to apologize or find an excuse for what happened with some of the recent hiring, that he has heard loud and clear that the next people to be hired will have to have the qualifications to perform a lot of the things that the Building Inspectors do. Director Chiu said that as the Commission knows, the Department does not know that the people on the current list are from Health Inspection; they may have structural or construction experience. Director Chiu said that he wants to address the Commission's concerns, but at the same time he has concerns about having a freeze until this thing is worked out and legally there can be no change until 2001 of December. Director Chiu said that this would be eight months before the Department could do anything so he has strong concerns about putting on a hiring freeze when everyone knows that there is a lot of work to be done in Housing. Director Chiu said that he would give his commitment that the next person that is hired in Housing Inspection would fall into the category that everyone is talking about. President Fillon asked if Vice-President Hood still wanted to proceed with her motion. Vice-President Hood said that she appreciated what the Director had to say, but would like to add one clause to her motion. Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to add that unless such hires meet the goals stated of having more training in construction and being able to learn or already have knowledge of the Building Code and building inspection. Vice-President Hood asked if this were okay with Commissioner Guinnane who seconded the motion. Commissioner Guinnane said that was fine. President Fillon asked if there was any further Commission discussion or public comment. President Fillon asked the Secretary to take a role call. The motion carried unanimously with Commission Walker stating that she wanted to abstain. Ms. Boyajian said that Commissioner Walker could not abstain. Commissioner Walker said that she still felt that this was not within the Commission's jurisdiction. Ms. Boyajian said that the rules required every present Commissioner to vote unless they have a conflict of interest. Commissioner Walker asked if this was still getting into personnel issues by telling the Director whom he can hire. Ms. Boyajian said that the Commission was only urging the Director, but he could still act under his own discretion. Commissioner Walker said that she would vote yes, with misgivings.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC-021-01
6. Update on Litigation Committee meeting. [Commissioner's Guinnane, Santos & Walker]
Commissioner Santos said that the meeting occurred about two weeks ago and was quite a productive meeting. Commissioner Santos said that the litigation aspect of this Commission has determined that there is quite a bit of money that is coming to the Department and that there has been a substantial amount of effort on the part of the Litigation Committee to collect and enforce the collection process. Commissioner Santos said that the Litigation Committee meetings take about three or four hours as the members literally go over every single case that is pending on an individual basis. Commissioner Guinnane said that the Committee goes over about seventy-five cases at each meeting. Commissioner Walker said that she was not at the last meeting as she was excused. Commissioner Guinnane said that the Committee looks at cases and also decides whether to send those cases over to the City Attorney or not; all cases have to come before the Committee to be referred over. President Fillon asked if any cases had been referred. Commissioner Guinnane said that six or seven cases have been referred. Vice-President Hood stated that she would like to thank the Committee as this is a very time consuming process, but one of the more productive things in that it sends a message to scofflaw landlords.
7. Report on DBI's overtime policy. [Assistant Director Amy Lee]
Assistant Director Amy Lee said that in general there are two types of overtime, or two types of activities that are defined under overtime. Ms. Lee said that one is when the Department does not receive revenue and an employee works longer than eight hours, for instance when working on Community Outreach meetings that staff attends. Ms. Lee said that a big portion of the Department's overtime is off-hour inspections. Ms. Lee said that for fiscal year 2001 the budget is $409,000 for overtime, but year to date the Department has incurred only $272,000 worth of overtime expenses; however, the Department has earned over $300,000 of off-hour revenue. Ms. Lee said that she has tried to get the Controller's Office to define the off-hour inspections as something different than overtime so it doesn't sound as if the Department is mismanaging and people have to spend their time working overtime. Ms. Lee said that most of the overtime is attributable to off-hour inspections and in the past couple of years there has been a decline in overtime; this past year the Department has only incurred $270,000 worth of expenses and there are less than three months left in the fiscal year so the Department will probably come in under budget. Ms. Lee said that a lot of this is due to the way the Managers are looking into overtime and before an employee can work overtime there is a form that needs to be filled out prior to working the overtime that needs the signature of the Supervisor, Manager, Deputy Director and herself. Ms. Lee said that the Managers determine when overtime is needed and an example would be last week when the Controller's payroll system was down and someone said they needed overtime for eight hours because they had to make up time for when the system was not working and Ms. Lee said that she approved the overtime for only five hours. Ms. Lee said that for the past two years the Department has come in on or under budget for overtime. Ms. Lee said that the Department receives $300,000-$500,000 of off-hour revenues that offset the overtime costs. Vice-President Hood said that the Department seems to be doing better than most City departments. Commissioner D'Anne asked what kinds of activities require overtime and what is meant by off-hours. Ms. Lee said that is when an inspection cannot be conducted during regular business of 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Ms. Lee said that sometimes a tenant, such as Starbuck's Coffee, does not want to see an Inspector running around during the daytime and may request an inspection from 9:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Ms. Lee said that this is the case especially with electrical wiring and updating. Ms. Lee said that this is a special service that the customers ask of the Department and unfortunately sometimes some of the staff does not like to do this because even though they earn extra money they want to go home to their families, but the Department is trying to provide good customer service. Commissioner D'Anne asked about the revenue from these special inspections. Ms. Lee said that the customer pays for the cost of time and one-half. Commissioner D'Anne asked if there were such things as emergency inspections that require overtime. Ms. Lee said that yes, there are emergency inspections such as times when there is a mudslide. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the Inspectors are on call for emergencies. Ms. Lee said certainly. Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that he works with the Inspectors and what Ms. Lee is saying is correct, but what happens is for instance the Embarcadero Center where they may be doing life safety work and devices are going off that are ear piercing. Mr. Hutchinson said that the client does not want their tenants in the building to have to put up with this noise so many times when they are doing retrofits or upgrades they will coordinate a group of people and ask them to come after 5:00 p.m. Mr. Hutchinson said that the customer pays DBI staff to go out to their site. Mr. Hutchison said that the Controller's Office will not say that this is regular work, even though the Department is being compensated for it, so it looks like overtime, but in reality the Department is providing a higher level of service and recouping the cost. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department does provide other services such as a regular program on Saturdays where a Building Inspector goes out randomly through the City; sometimes a neighbor will call up and complain that the Department is not catching someone doing work without a permit because they are working on Saturdays and the Department targets those areas to try and discover people working without permits. Mr. Hutchinson said that even though the Department is not paid for this by the customer, the Department will get the fees back when the permit is taken out and the applicant is charged with penalties. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department ends up being compensated even when the overtime is not paid for by the customer.
8. Review of Communication Items. At this time, the Commission may discuss or take possible action to respond to communication items received since the last meeting.
a. Letter dated March 1, 2001 from The Sunshine Ordinance Task Force to City Department Heads regarding retention of e-mails.
b. Letter dated March 19, 2001 from Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors to All City Department Heads regarding Electronic Documents.
c. Board of Supervisors Inquiry dated February 28, 2001 requesting that all City departments for which a performance audit has been requested in the past ten years report on how their department has responded to the audit and otherwise significantly improved efficiencies in their department. Memorandum dated March 26, 2001 from Director Frank Chiu to Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors regarding inquiry #20010226-075, performance audits for DBI.
d. Memorandum dated March 7, 2001 from Laurence M. Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Technical Services Division regarding Review of Administrative Bulletin AB-041, Application of the State Historical Building Code.
e. Memorandum dated March 6, 2001 from Laurence M. Kornfield, Chief Building Inspector, Technical Services Division regarding Administrative Bulletins under Review.
f. Resolution No. 151-01 regarding Standards of Conduct for City Commissioners.
g. Letter dated February 27, 2001 from Jeffrey S. Maready to Supervisor Mark Leno and copied to BIC President Fillon regarding 4733 & 4741-18th Street.
h. Letter dated March 20, 2001 from Jeffrey S. Maready to Building Inspector Carla Johnson and copied to President Fillon regarding 4733 & 4741-18th Street.
i. Letter dated March 20, 2001 from Jeffrey S. Maready to Supervisor Mark Leno and copied to President Fillon regarding 4733-4741 18th Street.
j. Letter dated March 28, 2001 from Director Frank Chiu to Jeffrey S. Maready regarding 4733-18th Street.
k. Board of Supervisors Inquiry dated February 28, 2001 requesting all City departments to provide the Board with a copy of their original 2001/02 proposed budget requests, their current draft 2001/02 budget requests, including their descriptions of plans and programs and summaries prepared for the 2001/02 budget. Memorandum dated March 20, 2001 from Director Frank Chiu to Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors regarding inquiry #20010226-016, 2001/02 budget for DBI.
l. Board of Supervisors Inquiry dated March 1, 2001 requesting that all City departments submit a list of items they intend to bring before the Finance Committee that may require any type of retroactive approval of funds, and encourage them to bring forth any such items as soon as possible to avoid delaying or jeopardizing Finance Committee approval. Memorandum dated March 20, 2001 from Director Frank Chiu to Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors regarding inquiry #20010226-147, requests that may require retroactive approval of funds for DBI.
m. Board of Supervisors Inquiry dated February 28, 2001 requesting all City departments to provide the Board with a copy of their original 2001/02 proposed budget requests, their current draft 2001/02 budget requests, including their descriptions of plans and programs and summaries prepared for the 2001/02 budget. Memorandum dated March 20, 2001 from Director Frank Chiu to Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors regarding inquiry #20010226-016, 2001/02 budget for DBI.
n. Board of Supervisors Inquiry dated March 1, 2001 requesting that all City departments submit a list of items they intend to bring before the Finance Committee that may require any type of retroactive approval of funds, and encourage them to bring forth any such items as soon as possible to avoid delaying or jeopardizing Finance Committee approval. Memorandum dated March 20, 2001 from Director Frank Chiu to Gloria L. Young, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors regarding inquiry #20010226-147, requests that may require retroactive approval of funds for DBI.
o. Letters of commendation received from the public regarding DBI employees and Director Chiu's letters of response to the public.
p. DBI Newsletter.
President Fillon stated that there were several items, so he would ask the Commissioners to speak up if they had any comment on a particular item or for the public to step forward if they wished to do so.
Commissioner D'Anne said that in referring to 8b, could the Department put information on CD ROMs and not have to print out copies as she was thinking of all of the paper that is wasted. Commissioner D'Anne asked if all of these papers had to be saved. Vice-President Hood said that the paper did not have to be saved, but could be recycled. President Fillon said that Commissioner D'Anne could address this issue to staff on item #10.
Commissioner Walker asked about Item #8c and asked if the Commission had to respond to this request as far as the management audit is concerned. Director Chiu said that he had already responded. Commissioner Marks said that the new Commissioners did not get a copy of the 1998/1999 audit and said that it would be helpful for all of the new members to have that.
Commissioner Marks referred to Item #8e and asked if these were the Administrative Bulletins that were under review. Commissioner Marks asked if these bulletins were being circulated for review and would eventually come to the Commission for adoption. Director Chiu said that this was correct. Director Chiu said that before the Department brings the draft document before the Commission for review or approval the Department likes to get all of the interested parties to become involved for their feedback. Director Chiu said that this is the reason for the meeting on April 7th and then the final draft will come before the Commission for approval.
Commissioner Walker said that she supported item 8f.
President Fillon said that Items g, h, I & j were regarding the same property. Mr. Jeff Maready introduced himself and his partner Mr. Keith Packard and said that he would like to take just three minutes to explain the situation. Mr. Maready passed out colored photos of his property and the property next-door to the Commissioners. Mr. Maready said that he and Mr. Packard are the owners of the residence next-door to the new construction, which is taking place at 4733 - 18th Street, and their property is 4741 - 18th Street, which they bought in July 1999. Mr. Maready said that his house was built in 1938 and stated that he has been an owner and resident in San Francisco since 1993. Vice-President Hood asked if the property was the white building in the pictures. Mr. Maready said that yes, their property was a white stucco tiled roof house to the right in the pictures. Mr. Maready said that the pictures really did a good job of explaining why they had to come before the Commission. Mr. Maready said that they had been informed by the contractor as well as by the Building Inspector assigned to the project that their house is now not to code because the new house has been built too close to their chimney. Mr. Maready said that the wall of the new construction and the chimney has been on their house since it was built in 1938; (there have been no alterations made to their house since it was built) has created a fire hazard for the occupants of the new condominiums. The new building will be a two-unit condominium project, which replaced a small cottage, which was one of the old earthquake cottages. Mr. Maready said that it has created a significant liability for he and his partner given that they have done nothing but buy the house and live there. Mr. Maready said that the letters the Commissioners had in front of them were just a few of the letters that have been sent to various individuals in the Planning and Building Departments and stated that they have spent two months making many visits to 1660 Mission Street to try to gather information and talk to people to see what they might do to resolve this issue. Mr. Maready said that they have met with Carla Johnson, the Building Inspector assigned to this project, Tom Wang, the Planner and a variety of other professionals in the Building and Planning Departments. Mr. Maready said that almost every person they have talked to and especially when they see the pictures have commented that this should never have been allowed to happen. Mr. Maready said that the problem is that not one of these individuals has been willing to take this on and help them to resolve this problem. Mr. Maready said that they were appealing to the Commission for assistance. Mr. Maready said that the Commission were also copied with letters he has sent to Supervisor Mark Leno's office and as a result of their communication with the Supervisor's office they have been informed that Supervisor Leno has already begun to take the steps to work with the City Attorneys to draft legislation to make sure that this does not happen in the future. In other words, contractors would be required to notify neighbors that a structure is being proposed that will result in the neighbor's property being out of compliance with the Code. Mr. Maready said that unfortunately this helps people in the future, but does not help to remedy their situation. Additionally, Mr. Maready said they have taken steps to try to find an architect, and they have contacted several, to try and get an idea of what this would cost if it turns out that they are fully responsible for resolving this. Mr. Maready said that most of the good architects cannot even touch this project until Fall or early next Spring, but informally they have been given ranges of anywhere from $15,000 - $20,000 to alter the chimney and bring it into compliance with the Code. Mr. Maready said that today, he and Mr. Packard were asking the Commission to assist them and asking that the Commission suspend the building permit for this project until they can reach a resolution with the owners that is agreeable to both parties and is in compliance with the Building Code regulations for all parties. Mr. Maready thanked the Commission for allowing him to speak and said they would be happy to answer any questions.
Commissioner Santos stated that he happens to be the Structural Engineer that structured this project and said that he was having a meeting with Inspector Carla Johnson tomorrow. Commissioner Santos said that he would be happy to meet with Mr. Maready and Mr. Packard immediately after the meeting and would assist them in obtaining structural drawings and any sort of documents that they would need to rectify the situation. Commissioner Santos said that he works with architects on a daily basis and that would not be problem, nor would timing be an issue. Commissioner Santos said that as soon as he finished his meeting with Carla Johnson he would meet with Mr. Maready and Mr. Packard and said that he was sure a very favorable resolution could be found to this issue. Commissioner D'Anne asked how much higher it was required to build the fireplace. Vice-President Hood said that she was an architect and said that under the base code, even if there was no house next-door, the fireplace would be out of compliance because now a fireplace has to be three feet from the property line before a fireplace can be taken up. Vice-President Hood said that the fireplace is right on the property line so it would have to make a turn and then go up and then the fireplace has to be at least ten feet higher than any structure within a certain distance away. Vice-President Hood said that the fireplace would have to be at least ten feet higher than the second story slopped roof next to the property so it is mostly a more visual thing in how to make it look good on the house. Vice-President Hood said that she could not see how it could cost $20,000, but the chimney will have to be run over and then up with probably a wood framed structure that will have very little weight on it. Commissioner Santos said that he would have an architect work that out. Vice-President Hood said that Commissioner Santos has been very helpful in assisting people with problems such as this one. Vice-President Hood stated that the Commission would not be able to take any action as this is not an agendized item, but the Commission likes to encourage people to work things out when they can. Mr. Maready said that this was all that he and Mr. Packard wanted. Commissioner Santos said that he would meet Mr. Maready and Mr. Packard at the property on Thursday. Commissioner Walker said that she wanted to thank these public members for pushing this issue with Supervisor Leno as this is a situation that probably happens a lot and said that if they were properly notified this could have probably been dealt with earlier on in the planning and building stages. Commissioner Walker said that the noticing requirement is probably a good solution and hopefully the Commission can look at that legislation before it goes through to make sure it is complete. Commissioner Santos said that Mr. Maready and Mr. Packard brought the property in 1999 and the application was made before that time. Mr. Maready said that the notification expired seven days before they closed on the property and this was unfortunate timing. Commissioner D'Anne said that she did not see why this new structure was allowed to be so much higher than the existing structure. Vice-President Hood said that would be a Planning Code issue. Vice-President Hood said that in the State Code it is very much the responsibility of the property owner regardless of what the person next door does, for example, there is a requirement if you are excavating, say somebody next door to you decides to go down forty feet; all they have to do is send you a letter about that and you are legally obligated to hold your own dirt up. Vice-President Hood said that however, as a matter of practical resolution, the person who is digging the hole will go to the property owner next door and say, look I'll hold your dirt up with my retaining wall if you'll be nice and let this thing go smoothly. Vice-President Hood said that it is more a negotiating strategy than to actually force them to pay. Vice-President Hood said that maybe the neighbors are in the process of stepping up to the plate. Mr. Maready said that he hoped this is what he is hearing is going to happen because there has been none of this to date. Commissioner Santos said that he was unaware of this situation until he received these letters. Mr. Maready said that he wanted to clarify that the meeting that Commissioner Santos was going to tomorrow was on this specific issue. Commissioner Santos said the meeting was taking place at the site. President Fillon asked Commissioner Santos to let Mr. Maready and Mr. Packard know about the specifics of the meeting. Commissioner Walker asked that the public members let the Commission know what happens. Mr. Keith Packard said that he wanted the Commission to know that the previous structure was not next to their chimney, but the footprint of the new structure has expanded such that it has come out to be parallel with their building. Commissioner Walker said that this was a Planning Department issue and Vice-President Hood said that the zoning permits that. Vice-President Hood said that if someone covers up another persons property line window, that property line window owner has to put a one-hour filler into the window; it is not the neighbor who is building who is required to pay and if the neighbor is nice the contractor will do it for goodwill, but they are not legally required to do it and that is the way the State law is written. Commissioner Walker said that generally what Commissioner Santos is talking about would have happened earlier in the process so it would have worked better for the neighbor and the project. Commissioner Santos said that unfortunately the previous owner was not concerned with this issue. Mr. Maready thanked the Commission for their assistance.
9. Review and approval of the Minutes of the BIC meeting of March 7, 2001.
Commissioner Santos made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guinnane, that the minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC-022-01
10. Commissioner's Questions and Matters.
a. Inquiries to Staff. At this time, Commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures, which are of interest to the Commission.
Commissioner D'Anne said that in item 8a it says that the Department has to retain all e-mails and in another part it states that they have to be printed out and saved as hard copy. Commissioner D'Anne said that everyone was going to be overwhelmed by all of this paperwork. Commissioner D'Anne said that she just had a question as to whether this can be retained in cyberspace or on CD ROM or some other method rather than paper. Commissioner D'Anne said that it says that the Department is required under the Sunshine Ordinance to keep all e-mails. Commissioner Walker asked if Commissioner D'Anne was talking about interdepartmental in DBI's computers. Commissioner D'Anne said that she was reading page one that stated that any e-mail that is created or received in connection with transaction of public business should be retained by the Department and said she was just asking the question if it can be retained on a disk or does it necessarily have to printed out. Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that e-mail is not some special type of document that can be destroyed willy-nilly and it depends on the subject manner of it. Commissioner D'Anne said that it says it must be printed out and she just wants to know if instead of printing it out, can it be saved on a disk. Ms. Boyajian said that if there is a public file than the e-mail needs to be printed out before it is deleted so that it is saved somewhere. Commissioner Walker said that if it not going to be deleted it can probably be kept where it is. Commissioner D'Anne said that she is just concerned about all of the space that this paper takes up and the time consumed in printing out e-mails if it can be saved by electronic methods. Ms. Boyajian said that saving it by electronic methods would be fine as long as it is not deleted.
Commissioner D'Anne said she wanted to clarify that Commissioner Marks asked for a copy of the Controller's audit as she had the same question.
b. Future Meetings/Agendas. At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Building Inspection Commission.
Commissioner Guinnane said that he had several items. Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like a list of all the buildings that have been inspected in San Francisco that the Commission wanted done a couple of years ago and the Department was given a year and a half or two years to do it. Commissioner Guinnane said he wanted a list of all of these buildings and how they have been rated and a list of all of the NOVs that have been issued. Commissioner Guinnane said number two he wanted to know what percentage was drive by inspections, who authorized the drive by inspections, if any, and why were the inspections done on Saturdays. Number three, in meeting with the Housing Inspectors yesterday, Commissioner Guinnane said that they were telling him that the computer system is constantly down everyday and said that he would like to get back on the MIS like the Commission was a couple of years ago. Commissioner Guinnane said he wanted to know what is being spent and said he wanted some sort of evaluation as to what is going on with the computer system as it looks like nothing has changed there at all. Commissioner Guinnane said that he also wanted information on the generating system that is set up for a power failure and said he wanted to know when the power went down, what happened at 1660 Mission and what was actually up and running versus what wasn't. Commissioner Guinnane said he wanted to know if the system is sufficient. Commissioner Guinnane stated that he wanted to know on the emergency orders how many cases there are and how much money has been put out on those orders and how the Department monitors for repayment. Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to follow-up with the City Attorney on the hiring freeze and wanted to get an opinion on that to see if this Commission has the authority to do that or not. Ms. Boyajian asked if Commissioner Guinnane was asking for a written opinion. Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted a written opinion.
Commissioner D'Anne said that at the beginning of the meeting she asked a number of questions and asked if she would have to repeat those requests. Secretary Aherne said that she could get the information from the minutes. Commissioner D'Anne said that she wanted to know what the definition of a residential hotel is, how many have been inspected and would like to see the reports for the past five years. Commissioner Guinnane asked if this would be covered under his request for the number of buildings inspected. Commissioner D'Anne said as long as the residential hotels could be separated as they have their own special problems. Commissioner Marks said that at a previous meeting Commissioner D'Anne had asked for a report on the non-civil service positions. Commissioner D'Anne said that she was informed by e-mail that this was being taken care of by Amy Lee. Ms. Lee said that she would probably have it ready in the afternoon. Commissioner Marks asked if all of the Commissioners could receive this information.
11. Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.
There was no public comment.
12. Adjournment.
Commissioner Guinnane made a motion, seconded by Commissioner D'Anne that the meeting be adjourned.
The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC-023-01
The meeting was adjourned at 2:55 p.m.
_______________________
Ann Marie Aherne Commission Secretary
SUMMARY OF REQUESTS BY COMMISSIONERS
Issue of expediters, preferential treatment and political favoritism. - Commissioners Walker & D'Anne Pages 2-4 & 5
Are building plumbing, electrical and mechanical inspectors certified? - Commissioner D'Anne Page 4
Parking - How many spots are leased, how many are for visitors, how many are for staff and how many are for BIC business vehicles? - Commissioner D'Anne Page 4
Design professional of a project to perform special inspections. Meet with Commissioner Guinnane and design professionals to come up with a draft for legislation.- Commissioner Guinnane Page 7 & 8
2838 Sacramento Street to be on next agenda. - Commissioner Walker Page 11 & 12
Secretary to notify union of discussions regarding Housing Division changes to MQ and training. - Commissioner Walker Page 15
Copies of 1998/1999 audit to new Commissioners. - Commissioner Marks Page 20
Follow-up on meeting with Commissioner Santos and neighbors at 4733 - 4741 - 18th Street. Commissioner Walker Pages 20 - 22
List of all buildings inspected in San Francisco, how they were rated and a list of all NOVs that have been issued as a result of inspection. Also, how many inspections were done by drive by, who authorized the drive by inspections and how many were done on Saturdays. - Commissioner Guinnane Page 24
Report on MIS and allegations that the computers are down everyday in the Housing Division. - Commissioner Guinnane Page 24
Report on generating system for 1660 Mission - is it sufficient and what happened when the power went down, what was working and what was not. - Commissioner Guinnane Page 24
Report on emergency orders, how many cases there are and how much money has been put out on those orders; how the Department monitors repayment. - Commissioner Guinnane Page 24
Follow-up with City Attorney on legality of hiring freeze - written report from City Attorney. - Commissioner Guinnane Page 24
Definition of a residential hotel, how many have been inspected and reports for the past five years. - Commissioner D'Anne Page 24
Report on non-civil service positions sent to all Commissioners. - Commissioner Marks Page 24