Department of Building Inspection

Building Inspection Commission

The regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 9:15 a.m. by President Murphy.

1.   Call to Order and Roll Call – Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENTS:

Mel Murphy, President

Reuben Hechanova, Vice-President
Kevin Clinch, Commissioner
Frank Lee, Commissioner
Robin Levitt, Commissioner
Criss Romero, Commissioner
Debra Walker, Commissioner
Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary

D.B.I.REPRESENTATIVES:

Vivian  Day, Acting Director
Edward Sweeney, Deputy Director
William Strawn, Communications Manager
Rosemary Bosque, Chief Housing Inspector
Laurence Kornfield, Acting Manager, Permit Services
Pamela Levin, Administration & Finance Division Supervisor

Sonya Harris, Secretary

5.       Discussion of administrative issues related to departmental staffing.

Building Inspector Dennis Carlin thanked the Commissioners and Director Day for the opportunity to speak about the reduction in staff at DBI, particularly the Building Inspectors.  Mr. Carlin stated that the Department would be losing 12 Building Inspectors, 9 Electrical Inspectors, 3 Plumbing Inspectors and 3 Housing Inspectors.  Mr. Carlin said that last Wednesday at the Board of Supervisors’ sub-committee meeting some of the Board of Supervisors were advocating on behalf of the Housing Inspectors.  Mr. Carlin said that at this time, under these conditions, he found it upsetting that there was political pressure being put on this Department and said that it is not in the best interests of DBI.  Mr. Carlin thanked Commissioner Walker for speaking up on the Building Inspectors’ behalf at that meeting and thanked Director Day for trying to hold DBI together in these trying times and under political pressure.  Mr. Carlin read a letter that was sent to the Building Safety Journal that was authored by Tony Falcone, the Building Official for the City of Agora Hills, California.  Mr. Carlin said that the letter would explain what the Building Inspectors do in the field everyday.  Mr. Carlin read, “Nowhere will you find a museum, monument, statue or even a plaque honoring the heroic efforts of our Building Inspectors. Although they have saved countless lives, most people are unaware of their silent virtue over our safety.  The fact is that a large segment of our society is complacent about building safety. How many people have taken for granted the fact that the buildings in which we live, work, and shop are structurally sound and can be safely exited in the event of an emergency? We don't worry about the water coming out of our faucets being contaminated, the risk of fire or electrocution when we plug in our electrical appliances, or the possibility of getting sick due to improper ventilation systems. These are examples to point out just a few minimum standards that the public at large has come to assume are enforced throughout the country. How is it that we can be so care-free about building safety?  The answer is embodied by the men and women who go about their daily duties as Building Inspectors to ensure that minimum life, health and safety standards are followed. Their proactive, preventive enforcement of our building codes have afforded this nation a level of comfort and safety unmatched anywhere in the world. Despite this, how many people in our communities know what Building Inspectors do? Ask any elementary school student to describe the responsibilities of a Firefighter or a Police Officer and he or she will almost certainly be able to give you some sort of description, but ask about a Building Inspector and you will probably get a blank stare. Are these devoted individuals any less heroic because they prevent fires rather than extinguish them? The difference is that one is catastrophic and newsworthy and the other goes unnoticed.  When Building Inspectors are noticed, they are often considered nuisances or agents of an invasive bureaucracy.  It takes years of experience and schooling to achieve the knowledge required to be a Building Inspector. They must understand and apply thousands of ever changing, evolving code requirements. These professionals have never been self-promoting. They do not wear recognizable uniforms or regularly visit schools to talk about building safety but maybe they should.  The children would learn early on about all the men and women who serve and protect us every day.  If the public had the ability to realize the countless thousands of lives saved by Building Inspectors they would honor them with the highest respect, but even if that never happens, the silent defenders will continue their dutiful sentry as they have for over 100 years to promote, and preserve life, health and safety in this country.”

Inspector Carlin called on Senior Building Inspector Rick Halloran to speak on this issue.  Mr. Halloran thanked the Commission for the opportunity to make a presentation and thanked Director Day for all that she has done for the Building Inspectors.  Mr. Halloran said there is nobody in DBI that is naïve enough to think that the Department is not going through tough times which result in making tough decisions.  Mr. Halloran stated that the Building Inspectors are fully prepared to accept and receive tough decisions, but said that in talking with Building Officials in other cities, specifically Fairfield, Palo Alto and a number of others he found out that most of these cities have not done any layoffs other than that of temporary or part-time personnel.  Mr. Halloran said that within the City of San Francisco and throughout other cities in the State he did not believe that any other department has taken the proportional losses that DBI has. Mr. Halloran said that 50% of the losses have come from inspection services and said that this number is scheduled to increase.

Mr. Halloran stated that the Electrical Division has been receiving decreases in personnel since January 2008 as personnel has either been laid off or reassigned.  Mr. Halloran spoke about the real dangers of faulty electrical systems being installed.  Mr. Halloran stated that the causes of this current money situation were a result of some very questionable decisions made by past administrations and their lack of foresight.  Mr. Halloran said that instead of dwelling on the past the Building Inspection Association would like to support this current administration and the Commission and move forward.  Mr. Halloran said that he wanted to talk about the immediate ramifications of these layoffs and what is happening.  Mr. Halloran said that at some recent meetings there were a number of statements made that made it sound like Building Inspectors were sitting around playing monopoly with nothing to do.  Mr. Halloran said that this was the impression that was made and said that nothing could be further from the truth.  Mr. Halloran sated that the Inspectors are contractually obligated to do inspections that come in from 2005 through 2008 and said that there are thousands of inspection that have not been completed; the Inspectors are still averaging 1,200 inspections per week.  Mr. Halloran stated that this is up or down approximately 100 inspections from this time last year, but unfortunately these inspections are being done with fewer Inspectors.  Mr. Halloran said that the Electrical Division recently had a record revenue month and brought in more permits than ever in their history with the exception of October and all of those jobs are going to have to be inspected; when an electrical system goes bad, no good things happen.  Mr. Halloran said that the Inspectors do anticipate a downturn due to the economic crisis, but it is not here today and not in the foreseeable future.  Mr. Halloran said that he has talked to representatives of various ownership groups, contractors, and the Fire Department and all of these people are concerned about the public safety aspects of these layoffs and how this is not a favorable environment.

Mr. Halloran said that Inspectors perform many other functions rather than just inspections and plan checking and all of these additional functions are being impacted.  Mr. Halloran stated that there has been a lot of talk about housing and substandard housing and said that illegal units are an issue that the Building Inspectors handle with four to five complaints coming in each week; this is substandard housing in which people’s lives are in danger.  Mr. Halloran said that it is the Building Inspector’s job to try and abate and legalize these, but of the two full-time Inspectors that dealt with these types of complaints one has been reassigned and one has been laid off.  Mr. Halloran stated that the Building Inspectors participate in the Department’s outreach programs where people at Cinco de Mayo or in Chinatown can bring their complaints to DBI in their own neighborhoods.  Mr. Halloran said that the Department can no longer afford this overtime and could not even afford to do this on a voluntary basis.  Mr. Halloran explained that the Condo Conversion program is a revenue generating program, but is now four months behind due to layoffs. 

Mr. Halloran said that he has been doing Special Inspections where the department deputizes private Inspectors to look at the more technical aspects of larger buildings and critical areas of buildings where safety is paramount.  Mr. Halloran stated that there are brand new laws under the 2007 Building Code and everything in special inspections has changed.  Mr. Halloran said that this is very important work and at this time last year the Department had one Senior Inspector, two clericals and three part-time Inspectors; now it is just him and one full time staff person who does an amazing job.  Mr. Halloran said that Disabled Access is another issue and said that he did not think that there was a more disenfranchised or under represented group in the City than people with disabilities.  Mr. Halloran said that this group is being severely hammered by these layoffs.  Mr. Halloran stated that there used to be two full-time Inspectors, a full time clerical and a Senior Building Inspector working on disabled access and now it is just him and he is scheduled to be laid off on May 1.  Mr. Halloran said that the future of this Department is very much in question.

Mr. Halloran said that Building Inspectors answer Code questions and interpret the Code and also review and implement Administrative Bulletins that aid in life safety issues.

Mr. Halloran said that every Building Inspector is I.C.C. certified to do their job as is required by law and additionally, every one of DBI’s Inspectors are certified for the Safety Assessment Program by the State Office of Emergency Services.  Mr. Halloran stated that Building Inspectors have over 150 voluntary certifications with thousands of hours of training; this is probably one of the most highly technically trained, most energetic, most ethical group that he has ever had the opportunity to work with.  Mr. Halloran said that the Electrical Internship Program is taught by one of DBI’s Electrical Inspectors and the Plumbing Internship is taught by a DBI Plumbing Inspector; there are condo certified teachers on DBI staff.  Mr. Halloran said that these are people who can teach all of the Building, Electrical and Plumbing Inspectors throughout the State of California.  Mr. Halloran said that these are the people that are going out the door, who cannot be replaced and will not sit and home and wait for somebody to call them back; they will have gone on to other jobs as they are so highly qualified.

Mr. Halloran said that another major concern is what will happen when another major earthquake hits the Bay Area.  Mr. Halloran said that one of the most important aspects of Building Inspectors’ jobs is rapid assessment as it is mandated by the Office of Emergency Services that Building Inspectors do a rapid assessment of all the critical facilities in San Francisco within 24 hours.  Mr. Halloran said that Building Inspectors are the key to letting the City know about its recovery operation as by State Law Building Inspectors are the only ones who are certified and trained to make those assessments.  Mr. Halloran stated that he had spoken with the Fire Chief and said that she is concerned that the Fire Department will be overwhelmed in an emergency.  Mr. Halloran said that there will be no one available to inspect the emergency housing stock and asked where people who are displaced are going to go; Building Inspectors are a key element in the recovery of the City of San Francisco. 

Mr. Halloran said that the Department has to look for additional resources of funding and said that the Building Department Chiefs and Seniors got together and started a program to try to get people to renew the permits that involve safety, inspections, etc.  Mr. Halloran stated that these programs have been very successful and are bringing in hundreds of thousands of dollars.  Mr. Halloran said that there has been much talk, but no action regarding code enforcement and said that code enforcement can be an excellent source of revenue.  Mr. Halloran said that the Commission should look at the CAPSS program and said that some time ago Building Inspectors volunteered their time to do a survey for this program.  Mr. Halloran said that now they find out that $2M is being allocated to an outside resource for a study that could be done very well by DBI’s staff of Engineers.  Mr. Halloran said that DBI staff could compile this data and said that a lot of it already exists for USGS.  Mr. Halloran stated that the Commission and the Department needs to look at these alternatives.  Mr. Halloran suggested looking at early retirement, 2 +2, furlough days, etc. and said that everything needs to be done to find the money to keep the Department afloat. 

Mr. Halloran said that the Department needs to stop diverting Building Department monies paid in good faith by people that expect service for it and who are not going to get the service that they paid for if the money is sent elsewhere.  Mr. Halloran stated that monies were taken before and there have been lots of questions as to where that money went, but no answers.  Mr. Halloran stated that this practice has to stop.  Mr. Halloran said that the Building Inspectors are asking that all decisions made by Director Day, the BIC and any other Boards be made for the welfare of the entire community and not just for one segment.  Mr. Halloran said that DBI needs to allocate its limited resources without political favoritism, but with a cold, clear eye toward the needs of the City and the populous as a whole.  Mr. Halloran stated that DBI has to look at, not who is friends with whom, and not at politics, but strictly at what is best for the Department of Building Inspection and health and life safety.  Mr. Halloran thanked the Commission for its time.

Inspector Dennis Carlin thanked the Commission once again for its time and relayed an incident that happened yesterday.  Mr. Carlin told how he was doing his inspections and got a call from Senior Building Inspector Joe Duffy telling him to get to a residence where someone was tearing off a roof without a permit.  Mr. Carlin said that the winds were about 25 to 30 miles per hour and debris was flying everywhere.  Mr. Carlin was able to divert an older woman from walking toward this disaster, wrote a Notice of Violation and shut down the job, virtually diverting any accidents. Mr. Carlin said that this was a small incident, but is an example of the small emergencies that Building Inspectors face everyday.  Mr. Carlin stated that when these calls come in there will be no one to respond due to limited staff.  Mr. Carlin said that hopefully some funds can be found to keep the safety of this City paramount. 

President Murphy thanked Inspectors Carlin and Halloran for their presentation.

Commissioner Walker thanked the Inspectors for their presentation and said that all of the Commissioners were disturbed by the necessary cuts that are happening at DBI because of the budgetary situation.  Commissioner Walker said that she would reiterate that the Commission is trying to deal with this by forwarding revenue generating measures as quickly as possible to prevent some of these cuts and remediate this into the new year.  Commissioner Walker stated that she thought that DBI Building Inspectors, all Inspectors, are the front line in an emergency.  Commissioner Walker said that the seismic strengthening program will hopefully provide work out in the construction industry as well as require more frequent inspections.  Commissioner Walker said that DBI’s Inspectors are the people who make the inventory of San Francisco safe and said that she worries a lot about the consequences of not having enough staff to deal with that. Commissioner Walker said that the Department has her full commitment to try and resolve the revenue shortages and said that she knows that Director Day is working hard on this, as no one feels the impact more than Director Day.  Commissioner Walker stated that it is horrible that the Department had to cut 90 positions, nearly 50 actual jobs and asked that everyone help the Department to move revenue adjustments forward as quickly as possible to help mediate it a bit.

Commissioner Levitt thanked Inspector Halloran for the presentation and said that everybody in the room was moved by what he had to say and understands how tough times are right now.  Commissioner Levitt stated that everybody in the Department, especially Director Day, is doing their best to try to rectify the situation.  Commissioner Levitt said that not only in San Francisco, but in the entire country the infrastructure has been neglected, including educational facilities, housing, roads, bridges and everything; it is a symptom of misallocated resources for a long time and misallocated priorities.  Commissioner Levitt said that the resources need to be found to keep an important Department such as DBI going and operating. 

Vice-President Hechanova said that the presentation showed some of the compelling reasons for the importance of Building Inspectors being paramount to the health, safety and welfare of the citizens in San Francisco.  Vice-President Hechanova said that looking backwards he would have hoped that the Department would have had more of a cushion to help keep employees during these hard economic times.  Vice-President Hechanova stated that for many years DBI was not charging enough fees for its services and asked Director Day how the Department now compared to other Bay Area municipalities as far as fees were concerned.  Director Day said that with the implementation of the fee study San Francisco increased fees by 25% and are now at an average level with other cities and are meant to be self-recovering.  Director Day stated that the fees had not been raised in 16 years and said that the Department would be in much worse shape had the fees not been raised last September.

President Murphy said that he sits on the Commission on the residential contractor’s seat and has known many of the DBI employees for the past 30 years.  President Murphy said that some great Inspectors were laid off, but said that he is optimistic that things are picking up as architects and engineers over the last couple of weeks are telling him that they are experiencing some activity for projects. 

Ken Cochrane stated that he wanted to speak from the customer’s side and said that the customers at DBI are alarmed by these layoffs.  Mr. Cochrane stated that the cuts are going to affect construction sites because there will not be enough Inspectors to cover the districts and this will hold up jobs.  Mr. Cochrane said that the people who are being laid off are really good, well-trained, smart people who do their jobs well.  Mr. Cochrane suggested that the Department work one day a week less in order to keep these very valuable people.  

Mr. Rodrigo Santos introduced himself as a Structural Engineer and President of the San Francisco Coalition for Responsible Growth (SFCRG).  Mr. Santos said that almost 20 years ago San Francisco endured a significant earthquake with a 7.1 magnitude. Mr. Santos said that at that time the Department of Building Inspection, in particular the Inspections Division, quickly and efficiently inspected thousands of properties an come up with a system of evaluating a property for damage with a green tag, yellow tag, or red tag.  Mr. Santos stated that this allowed for the reoccupation of a lot of these structures very quickly and efficiently and said that the program became a national model for other municipalities encountering similar events.  Mr. Santos said that it is imperative that the City preserve the quality of building inspections that this City is known for.  Mr. Santos said that there was an item for an update of the CAPSS program on today’s agenda and that it is not a matter of if, but when the next seismic event is going to happen. Mr. Santos said that Building Inspectors are first responders along with Firefighters and emergency medical personnel.  Mr. Santos stated that it is important that Director Day do everything to preserve the quality of Building Inspectors that have a great and vast knowledge in construction.

Inspector Dan Fross introduced himself as President of the San Francisco electrical Inspector’s Association and thanked Inspectors Rich Halloran and Dennis Carlin for their fine presentation.  Mr. Fross said that the Electrical Department is way down in the number of Inspectors and said that in his opinion the division is not going to be able to function at the level that everyone is accustomed to for providing service to the contractors, homeowners and to people making complaints.  Mr. Fross said that regarding the cushion that was in the Department it was his understanding that during the last six years $14M was taken from DBI and given to other departments, so DBI had a cushion it just did not stay in the Department.

Mr. Michael Theriault of the San Francisco Labor Council and a former member of the BIC said that everyone understands that if there is going to be an economic recovery that recovery will begin with construction.  Mr. Theriault stated that the human infrastructure of that recovery will include the Building Inspection Department and in particular the Building Inspectors.  Mr. Theriault said that he understands the economic difficulties of the Department and asked DBI to examine with the utmost scrutiny and requests made by other City departments on DBI’s funds.  Mr. Theriault said that care should be taken to see if these demands are truly justified or if the money should be kept where it belongs in the Department of Building Inspection.

Ms. Kelton Finney of SFCRG said that she wanted to start by echoing her personal support to these very talented, well-trained men and women who are Building Inspectors.  Ms. Finney said that these Inspectors do an immense job in San Francisco that the public does not readily see; the Inspectors go unnoticed, yet they provide critical services.  Ms. Finney stated that Inspectors are first responders and play a critical role in the structural evaluation of buildings and in the protection of life safety following a disaster.  Ms. Kinney said that if the City is not prepared for a seismic catastrophe something along the lines of Katrina could happen here.  Ms. Finney said that the City is working on several pieces of legislation to deal with vulnerable residential buildings, inspections for unoccupied residential structures, the removal of wooden ladders and many other issues to mitigate disasters that will require the expertise of Building Inspectors.  Ms. Finney said that when the economy does turn around experienced Inspectors need to be in place.  Ms. Finney urged the Commission to do everything in its power to preserve the jobs of these very important people.

Mr. Henry Karnilowicz said that he has numerous inspections every week and said that now Inspectors have to cover more than one district and are doing up to and beyond 20 inspections per day.  Mr. Karnilowicz said that this is very stressful and said that things are going to get much worse after the layoffs.  Mr. Karnilowicz stated that customers will not be able to get inspections and programs and new projects will not be able to start.  Mr. Karnilowicz urged the Commission to try to find funding to keep the excellent crew that is now in place.

Mr. Simon Quan of SFCRG said that he liked the fourth floor intake process and said that he would echo that it is important to have experienced Inspectors out in the field.

Mr. John Keogan of SFCRG said that this Commission and Director along with previous Commissioners and Directors have presided over the most successful Department in City government, so much so that over the last six years or so approximately $26M has been given over to other Departments.  Mr. Keogan stated that he knew that the Director would love to be able to get her hands on a portion of that money right now.  Mr. Keogan said that DBI has also invested wisely in training the Building Inspectors and other professional staff so to lay off any more of this expertise now would impact revenue generation, and is less productive for the customers and cause concern about life safety.  Mr. Keogan said that he was surprised to learn that Building Inspectors are not limited to inspecting foundations, frame insulation, electrical and plumbing, just to name a few, but Building Inspectors are first responders when there is a vital need for public safety.  Mr. Keogan stated that fire and police department personnel do a terrific job under life safety conditions, but do not make the call when it comes to buildings; it is Building Inspectors who make the call.  Mr. Keogan said that SFCRG would not like to see the Building Inspectors becoming an endangered species through more layoffs.

Mr. Luke O’Brien of SFCRG said that he did not want to repeat what was said before but said that he would like to voice his support for the members of DBI and the Inspectors.  Mr. O’Brien said that he found the presentation rather informative and said that it gave him cause for concern that we the City does not want to have “brain drain” by losing all of these experienced Building Inspectors.  Mr. O’Brien said that when DBI wants to go and pick up again after the economy comes back, the Department does not want to have to start training people all over again. Mr. O’Brien stated that February was quite a successful month in Real Estate for closed transactions so the City should not take a short-term view and be stuck with an inexperienced staff when the economy comes back. Mr. O’Brien said that the other thing he would say to justify having people with these services and their skills would be to look at the overall attitude within the City that is taken towards the building industry; it could certainly help to take a look at a lot of the properties across the City that are sitting derelict because of some bureaucratic problem or other or some ideology or some other reason or argument, whatever it might be. Mr. O’Brien said that everyone should have an understanding as fellow San Franciscans moving forward that buildings should not be left derelict or to be put in a position where the owner can do nothing because economically it is not viable for him to do something.  Mr. O’Brien stated that the City  should look into making sure that kind of waste is not going forward and that these buildings are not left like that; it would help economic activity and help provide work for everybody.

Mr. Charles Turner of SFCRG said that DBI cannot afford to lose its inspection staff that protects homeowners, tenants and people in general. Mr. Turner said that instead of focusing on cutting jobs the focus should be on generating income. Mr. Turner stated that there is a lot of growth going on in real estate sales and the market is coming back even though it is at lower prices. Mr. Turner said that this will generate work, but the Building Inspectors need to be there to help for the safety of San Francisco citizens.

Inspector Don Simas said that he as been a Building Inspector since 1986 and San Francisco is the fifth jurisdiction he has worked in. Mr. Simas stated that the thing that concerns him basically and personally is a disaster; San Francisco the earthquake in 1989 and Humboldt County had one in 1992.  Mr. Simas said that he was working in Humboldt County in 1992 and said that the Inspectors did not just go out and look at buildings for safety, but also became social workers because people are displaced and they want to know what they can do, what the next step is. Mr. Simas said that it concerns him, especially in this City where there are a lot of people that will be displaced. Mr. Simas stated that he thought it was important to keep Inspectors that are qualified to do the job and are able to point people in the direction they need to go – not only as their building is falling but where they can go for help throughout the City.  Mr. Simas said that his last day would be May 1^st.

Mr. John Cuneo said that he would like to start by saying that it was a privilege to work with DBI and the fine people here. Mr. Cuneo said that he was responsible for the condominium conversion process when he started and there was a backlog of approximately one year. Mr. Cuneo stated that the Department was getting that backlog down to one month, but now it is creeping back up toward four months and the fee has been increased five-fold. Mr. Cuneo said that this is kind of a tough pill for the customers to take.  Mr. Cuneo said that a number of people in the community believe that people who  are buying these condos are speculators, but said that in the over 500  cases he has been involved with he would say that less than 10% are  speculators; the applicants just want the American dream and a condo is their first place. Mr. Cuneo stated that the process is a very scary one for a lot of customers and said he would stay late at night or go out on lunch breaks to meet with people even after an inspection to try to hold their hands through this process. Mr. Cuneo said that he wanted to speak about last week’s campaign to save the three Housing Inspectors with the subcommittee of the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Cuneo said that he thought this added insult to injury and asked where the cuts were going to come from. Mr. Cuneo stated that there are 12 Building Inspectors going out the door, nine Electrical Inspectors and three Plumbing Inspectors and this is just the first round of layoffs. Mr. Cuneo said he would be happy to be one of the three Housing Inspectors knowing that they are going to get their jobs back. Mr. Cuneo said that a lot of his colleagues will never be coming back but said that he thought he would be getting a job in Sacramento so things will work out for him. Mr. Cuneo stated that these Housing Inspectors were appointed permanently after many of the Building Inspectors who are being laid off; some Building Inspectors who have been served notices have seven years in this Department.  Mr. Cuneo asked where the cuts will come from when these three Housing Inspector jobs are saved since someone has to pay for them.  Mr. Cuneo said that he would like to thank the Commission once again for its time. 

Inspector John Hinchion of the Building Inspection division said that to follow up on the previous speaker’s comments regarding the sub-committee meeting of the Board of Supervisors, he did not like the tone of some of the Supervisors toward the DBI Director as he felt there was a tone of intimidation.  Mr. Hinchion said that there were some good revenue ideas that came up at the BOS meeting, but said that he was concerned that if those revenues came to fruition there would be pressure from the BOS to collect those savings for this particular group that they seem to have an affinity for and it would not save any building inspectors’ jobs, which are the core of this Department.  Mr. Hinchion said that he had one suggestion regarding saving money in the budget since somebody had a question earlier about the buying of 1660 Mission Street:  Mr. Hinchion said that he would encourage the BIC to do a major study on how the Department came to buy the building with a surcharge that all the permit holders paid into to, and find out when the building was paid off. Mr. Hinchion stated that from his little knowledge of a mortgage, when it  is paid off the deed is returned and you own the building. Mr. Hinchion said that as soon as the building was paid off, which was around the same time another City department vacated two floors suddenly the Department of Real Estate owns the building and DBI has to pay rent for a building that the Department supposedly owned. Mr. Hinchion said that he would encourage the Commission to do a major investigation into this matter and hopefully the result will be that DBI pays no rent for a building that was paid for by the permit holders of the City, and that those savings would be allotted evenly across the entire Department.

Mr. Terrence Smith, a former Lieutenant of the San Francisco Fire Department said that he was present to speak for all of the Building and Electrical Inspectors that he has worked with over the years in the capacity of all of the buildings that have been built since 1996, when he took a job at the Bureau of Building Inspections. Lieutenant Smith said that in these economic times he understands that the Department is going to have to make cuts, but urged the Commission to consider not cutting any more than what has already been cut in those two jobs that he mentioned. Lieutenant Smith stated that it is critical that those positions be kept because the Fire Department deals with all of the emergencies, but the Building and Electrical Inspectors deal with the Fire Department on all life safety issues. Lieutenant Smith said that it takes a team to inspect and pass a building so it does not fall down in shambles. Lieutenant Smith urged the Commission to once again look over each and every job description and see how critical it is because the Fire Department needs those Electrical and Building Inspectors.

Mr. Jason McLane of the San Francisco Electrical Contractors Association said that the Association was celebrating its 100th Anniversary this year and said that the Electrical Inspectors are a vital part of what Electricians do. Mr. McLane said that he did not think he could express himself any better than what the presentation explained to the Commissioners, but said that the Electrical Inspectors are a vital part of the inspection process.  Mr. McLane stated that even with the new fee structure there is still a level of service that the public requires especially when it comes to timely inspections.  Mr. McLane said that everyone needs to make sure that the hospitals and schools that are being built are completed and done on time. Mr. McLean said that given that there was a 25% increase in fees the public would like to see the quality of service maintained. Mr. McLean stated that the Electrical Apprenticeship Program is run by Electrical Inspectors; these Inspectors are technically proficient, very well-trained individuals and this industry cannot survive without them.

There was no further public comment.

Ms. Pamela Levin, Administration & Finance Division Supervisor said that this item was regarding a supplemental for the Code Enforcement Rehabilitation Fund commonly known as the CERF fund. Ms. Levin stated that the Building Code requires that a separate ordinance be presented and passed by the Board of Supervisors to appropriate this funding as it cannot be part of the annual appropriation ordinance. Ms. Levin stated that based on the fact that the Department only has $80,000 in the appropriation authority, the authority to spend right now, but has $818,000 in fund balance and because there was discussion at the budget committee hearing last week regarding the possibility of using the CERF fund to help maintain code enforcement activities in the operating fund, the Department is forwarding this supplemental. Ms Levin explained that the first step in the supplemental process is approval for submission by the BIC and then it goes to the Mayor's Office and Board of Supervisors; it gets introduced by the Board of Supervisors for consideration by the budget committee and then has two hearings by the full Board.  Ms. Levin said that the necessity to start this long process is very high.  Ms. Levin explained that the allowable uses of the CERF is to first, defray cost incurred in the enforcement of local housing code provisions; second, to fund housing rehabilitation programs for persons and families of lower and moderate income as defined in the State health and safety code; and third to prevent or minimize displacement of tenants and homeowners as a result of local enforcement activities. Ms. Levin said that the State code basically says that the fund is to be used for any or all of the following activities and said that the source of the fund is actually from the State. Ms. Levin said that the money is allocated by the State Controller from the local agency code enforcement and rehabilitation fund. Ms. Levin stated that the supplemental will de-appropriate prior use and spending authority and re-appropriate it to specific allowable uses. Ms. Levin said that DBI will de-appropriate $81,000, leave $10,000 to fund the hardship loans and grants developed by the Mayor's Office of Housing and then transfer $343,000 to the repair and demolition fund to maintain a positive balance. Ms. Levin stated that she is working with the City Attorney's Office to get a handle on how much the Department would be eligible for in terms of settlements for code enforcement, litigation activities that are in the current year. Ms. Levin said that any transfers would then be put into the repair and demolition fund; the remaining $546,000 would be transferred to the operating fund for code enforcement activities. Ms. Levin stated that once this is approved by the BIC it will then be forwarded to the Controller's Office to actually prepare the legislation. Ms. Levin said that there is some discussion on this use, but in order to get the process started the BIC needs to approve it for submission.

Commissioner Walker thanked Ms. Levin for her work on this issue and said that she thought this was a creative way of trying to solve some of the Department’s staffing problems. Commissioner Walker said that it was her understanding that some of this money in the operating fund could be used to maybe restore a couple of positions. Director Day said that this would help extend the layoff notices until July 1 for some employees.  Commissioner Walker said that the potential benefit is it may give the Department a chance to move some of these revenue measures forward quickly to make a longer-term solution.  Ms. Levin stated that it was important to note that this is a one time only solution, so the point is well taken that additional work needs to be done to have an ongoing solution.

Vice-President Hechanova asked if the $343,000 to be transferred to the repair and demolition fund would create a positive balance.  Ms. Levin said that the entire amount would be needed and said that there would only be a $10,000 balance.  Commissioner Clinch asked if the money was still available given the State’s financial woes.  Ms. Levin said that this money is already sitting in the Department’s fund, but said that DBI has not received funding from the State for several years. Ms. Levin said that it is hard to get answers from the State, but said that the funding is available to the City in our coffers. Vice-President Hechanova said that to fund housing  rehabilitation programs for families of low and moderate income as defined in the State Health & Safety Code, is that fund  available in the current  category or is there some  fund that is being shifted from somewhere like the Housing Authority.  Ms. Levin said that the Mayor’s Office of Housing has established a program for grants and loans for people who need either some underground utility work or some electrical work as a lot of electricians are paid to do work for the low income.  Ms. Levin said that these no interest loans are paid back primarily when the property is sold, but the Department is pretty good in the amount that has gone out and has come back. Ms. Levin stated that the grants are all very small and said that $15,000 was the highest amount that she had seen. Ms. Levin said the process is determined by the Mayor's Office of Housing where there are strict criteria and where an agreement has to be signed.  Ms. Levin said that she was not sure whether there was other funding for this.

There was no public comment.

Chief Building Inspector Laurence Kornfield, Acting Manager of Permit Services said that he

would give a brief update on the CAPSS Program. Mr. Kornfield said that funding is an issue that has come up and said that CAPSS is funded from the Strong Motion Instrumentation Program, SMIP, which is money the Department receives from the State Department of Geological Survey and may only be used for purposes of seismic investigation and not staffing or general work in the Department. President Murphy asked how much money was in that fund.

Mr. Kornfield said that in addition to the current CAPSS balance for actual contractors he believed there was approximately $66,000.  Mr. Kornfield stated that the CAPSS contract is a fixed price contract and said that he did not anticipate any cost overruns or schedule changes that change the value. Mr. Kornfield said that he appreciated how the Building Inspectors were concerned that this program might be taking away work that they could be doing.

Mr. Kornfield said that the CAPSS Program is divided into a number of parts; the part regarding the soft- story building program is moving forward and the CAPSS Program has essentially completed the report and given it to the Commission and the Mayor’s Office.  Mr. Kornfield stated that now at the Board of Supervisors there is movement to develop soft-story 

programs, both voluntary programs and hopefully mandatory programs and the transfer of UMB funds. Mr. Kornfield said that CAPSS is now moving forward with the formulation of the earthquake damage standards and repair requirements so that after an earthquake the City will know what kind of repair standards should be applied. Mr. Kornfield said that this was a big problem in Los Angeles. Mr. Kornfield stated that CAPSS is completing the impact assessment report which should be out shortly and is studying what other cities and communities are doing to support seismic safety. Mr. Kornfield said that Mr. Tom Tobin, the project manager was present and asked if Mr. Tobin had anything to share with the Commission.  Mr. Tobin had no comments.  Mr. Kornfield said that his comments were just an update to let the Commission know that the Program is on track.  Mr. Kornfield thanked those Commissioners that had attended some of the CAPSS meeting and said that he enjoyed their participation.

Commissioner Walker said that on behalf of CAPSS, she had done a presentation at the Society of Seismologists of America in Monterey last week. Commissioner Walker said that San Francisco is really one of the only cities actively engaged in this effort to do soft-story programs. Commissioner Walker stated that she is in contact with the Assemblyman from San Luis Obispo who is forwarding an Assembly Bill to direct stimulus funds into cities to fund soft-story wood- frame mandatory programs and said that CAPSS would be looking at that to help advocate for funds on a State level.  Commissioner Walker said that those are direct grants to cities to help fund and maybe add to the possible repurposing of the Unreinforced Masonry funds to this effort. Commissioner Walker said that she would keep people informed of that Bill being sponsored by Assemblyman Blakesley from San Luis Obispo.

Vice-President Hechanova asked Commissioner Walker if she heard any response from other cities or sources regarding mandatory and voluntary compliance.  Commissioner Walker said that the programs that appear to work are the mandatory programs and said that the money from the State will only go to mandatory programs. Commissioner Walker stated that the repurposing of the Unreinforced Masonry Bond balance is a separate issue, and whether or not it is mandatory and/or voluntary, it is an incentive program, so a standard is established the money would be  available for any person doing it seismic upgrading and that could actually move forward before any mandatory  program. 

Commissioner Levitt asked Mr. Kornfield if any of the work that the CAPSS people are doing could have been done by Building Inspectors instead of hiring it out; is there any work that people being laid off could be engaged in regarding the CAPSS process? Mr. Kornfield said that he could not think of any offhand, but said that he would look at that and talk to the contractor.

Mr. Kornfield said that the Department was asked by the Commission years ago to make sure that a nonprofit agency was hired that would be hiring local and minority vendors to do some of the work; many of the participants in the program are women owned  businesses, or small businesses  working collaboratively under a  regional nonprofit organization.

President Murphy asked when the next report on CAPSS would be as it seems like it just drags on.  Mr. Kornfield said that this is essentially a two-year project.  President Murphy stated that it seems as if it has gone on longer than that.  Mr. Kornfield said that it has actually gone on for over 10 years because it started and was then stopped, but said that it is now well underway.  Mr. Kornfield said that CAPSS tries to report every other month to the Commission.

.

Commissioner Walker said that she would keep everyone apprised when there are hearings at the Board of Supervisors (BOS) because there are several items that are now at the BOS and will be presented to actually adopt legislation around a potential ballot measure. 

President Murphy asked when some of the CAPSS recommendations would be implemented.  Mr. Kornfield said that the outcome would be a number of incremental steps of recommended legislation like the soft story project with the next step probably being some recommendations for code changes on post-earthquake repair standards. Mr. Kornfield stated that then there will be discussions about potential incentives for private  property owners for other than soft story buildings, but said that the program is going to move along in  bits and pieces with, hopefully, a completed report on recommendations in about 18 months.

Commissioner Lee said that the Department should take advantage of the 20-year anniversary of the Loma Prieta earthquake that is coming up in October to present some of these recommendations to the public. Mr. Kornfield said that there is a very detailed and complex time frame and schedule for the CAPSS project outcomes and said that he would be sure that some of those things line up so there is some product for the October 20th anniversary, which is a big deal.

President Murphy asked for public comment.

Mr. Henry Karnilowicz said that he was looking forward to the day when legislation goes through for the retrofitting of soft story buildings. Mr. Karnilowicz said that he was concerned with the UMB program as the public has not heard much about it from CAPSS.  Mr. Karnilowicz said that he wanted to stress that it is important to keep the public informed about the displacement of tenants and other issues so that owners will want to complete retrofitting.

Director Day said that the Department proposes that the Commission send forth this legislation for approval with the addition of a fee for services included. 

.

Commissioner Lee asked what prompted this proposal.

Director Day said that she thought this was an attempt to get all the rental units on the books; there are a lot of units that do not have formal Certificates of  Occupancy or need to be added to buildings and they want to do an amended certificate in case one did not exist. Director Day stated that DBI did not start formalizing certificates of occupancy (CFC) until after the 1940's so there are a lot of buildings with units that are not formally on the Assessor's books or DBI’s books.  Commissioner Lee said that if this goes forward there should be an accurate account of rental units.  Director Day said that the City could get closer to the actual amount.

Commissioner Levitt said that it was his understanding that this was prompted by the Market/ Octavia Plan which changed the allowable densities in that area and could potentially change some of the uses there. Commissioner Levitt asked that Rick Galbraith from Supervisor Mirkarimi’s office come forward and explain this issue.

Mr. Rick Galbraith said that Supervisor Mirkarimi would be arriving momentarily, but explained that this particular piece of legislation was the realization that the largest impediment to the legalization of the secondary accessory units was the fact that parking would be required, but with the Neighborhood Commercial Transit (NCT) and Residential Transit Oriented (RTO) zonings that were generated out of that plan the parking minimums became parking maximums. Mr. Galbraith stated that in that way by just the broad stroke of the zoning brush these units became conforming as a matter of principle because parking was no longer required.  Mr. Galbraith said that this was an easy and efficient way for the property owners, without having to retrofit the building, to bring these particular units out of the shadows or out of the closet and into the light of day to be sure they are habitable and comply with the codes; an amended CFC could then be issued to delineate that they were previously existing.  Mr. Galbraith said that he had a very interesting conversation with the Planning Department a couple of weeks ago when the Commission chair admitted that he owns an illegal unit and asked what advantage it would be for him to do this.  Mr. Galbraith stated that other than being a law abiding citizen the property value would increase and the owner would be able to sell the property without having to take or hide the unit because it is not currently lawful. Mr. Galbraith said that the Supervisor assumed that any post-construction inspection fee would apply here as it would otherwise and said that the Department was not being asked to do anything for free. Mr. Galbraith said that the Supervisor’s office was happy that the Code Advisory Committee signed off on this legislation and asked for the BIC’s approval for this to go forward.

President Murphy called on Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi to speak on the issue.  Supervisor Mirkarimi said that his aide was doing a fine job, but added that for decades San Francisco has been trying to crack the nut about what can be done with regard to secondary units and the question of legitimatization. Supervisor Mirkarimi stated that after the Planning Commission   forwarded the Market/Octavia Plan to the Board of Supervisors, and when various departments and the community worked together toward the passage of the plan he began to raise the question of a strategy of what might be done with regard to secondary units as a pilot attempt. Supervisor Mirkarimi said that this legislation would attach this pilot to the zoning modifications on the NCT and RTO as it relates to Market/Octavia. Supervisor Mirkarimi stated that this was vetted with Planning and it was decided to try it in the Eastern Neighborhood Plan. Supervisor Mirkarimi said that he was pleased that the Code Advisory Committee had also approved the forwarding of this legislation.  Supervisory Mirkarimi stated that now it comes to the natural intersection of policy making and how we might be able to forward this in paving the way of making sure it might finally be a front-door approach in tackling what was not able to be tackled previously keeping in mind rent control so that is already retained and keeping in mind the responsibilities of the property owners to abide by.  Supervisor Mirkarimi asked that the BIC approve this legislation.

Commissioner Walker thanked Supervisor Mirkarimi for doing this and said it was a real step forward to bring these units out of the closet so to speak and legitimizing it and putting it under the City’s watchful eye. Commissioner Walker stated that it might be one of those things that have exacerbated the address issue that the BIC has heard about month after month. 

Commissioner Walker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Levitt, to approve this legislation.

Vice-President Hechanova said that he would like to support this because it brings forward the true need of additional housing, along with bringing about the possible seismic upgrades to some of these locations. Vice-President Hechanova said that his concern was in the category of policy, does this put the horse before the cart if, where in planning is the language right now that allows for this to happen that DBI could then endorse it on the sequence from Planning to the Building  Department.  Supervisor Mirkarimi said it does and that is why this has been done on a two-front approach between Planning Department staff and the Planning Commission which has given its blessing and with DBI making sure that both are covered. Supervisor Mirkarimi said that this would go a long way in figuring out the true housing stock in San Francisco and said that if all goes well, then perhaps it could be used in other parts of the City.

President Murphy said that this legislation would be an initiative for owners to come in and spend a few bucks on their units to fix them up and make them nice places for people to live.  Commissioner Levitt spoke about converting soft story garage spaces into living spaces as this would be an incentive to seismic upgrading if owners were able to get an economic benefit by building rental units.  Vice-President Hechanova said that there should be a subsidy of a Muni pass or something that would encourage the use of public transportation if there is the removal of a parking garage or reduction of what was required for parking.  Supervisor Mirkarimi said that he would look into that issue.

President Murphy thanked Supervisor Mirkarimi for his presentation and called for public comment.

Mr. Tim Colon said that he was the Executive Director of the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition, which is a 10 year organization with 85 members that have a centrist voice for smart development and solutions for housing affordability.  Mr. Colon stated that this is a conversation around the secondary units that is long overdue and said that it has long been a goal of the Housing Action Coalition to get a conversation going in San Francisco around secondary units because of their high environmental friendliness and very low footprint; they are an ideal type of housing. Mr. Colon said that these are a significant source of affordable housing and said that 10 years ago, SPUR put out a study that estimated that there were 30,000 to 40,000 secondary units in San Francisco; that number is growing all the time. Mr. Colon said that he was interested in San Francisco getting its collective head out of the sand, recognizing this housing and making it a form of housing that has to abide by certain requirements. Mr. Colon stated that the San Francisco Housing Action Coalition strongly supports this and commend Supervisor Mirkarimi for the courage to bring this forward. Mr. Colon said that there will be a lot of neighborhoods that will be upset to hear about this, but said it was important for neighbors that are building these units for aged parents, children or supplementing their mortgage payment.  Mr. Colon said that this might be an opportune time if the Department is losing Inspectors, to have Inspectors make sure that these secondary units are good, suitable and safe.  Mr. Colon urged the BIC to move this forward.

.

Mr. Henry Karnilowicz said that he is a member of the Code Advisory Committee and made the motion to support this legislation. Mr. Karnilowicz said that he recalled many moons ago when  Willie Brown was elected and it was splashed across the Chronicle that San Francisco was going to legalize this, but said that it was thrown under the rug and never heard about again. Mr. Karnilowicz stated that he thought that Supervisor Mirkarimi was rather brave to have brought this up and to bring it to legislation right now.  Mr. Karnilowicz said that this is a win-win situation for the owners of the property as they will be able to have legal units in a building and a win-win for the tenants because they will have safe housing.

Mr. Luke O’Brien of The San Francisco Coalition for Responsible Growth (SFCRG) said that this is a very enlightened piece of legislation.  Mr. O’Brien said that as a Real Estate agent in the City this would go a long way in helping with the disclosure package when a building is transferred; it would clear up the muddy waters surrounding legal/illegal or warranted/unwarranted units.  Mr. O’Brien said that he wanted to lend his support to this legislation and to commend Supervisor Mirkarimi for putting it forward.

Mr. John Keogan of SFCRG said that the Commissioners had a rather tough morning and said that he appreciated all of the emotions that the Commissioners went through during the discussion on the Building Inspectors.  Mr. Keogan stated that it is rather encouraging to find at the end of the morning that this excellent recommendation from Supervisor Mirkarimi is presented.  Mr. Keogan said that he could really add nothing more than what has been said as this is a real step forward in learning more about what housing really is in San Francisco.  Mr. Keogan said that as the previous speaker mentioned from the real estate perspective, just having compliant buildings come to the market and have them go through the process much quicker and making the deal much faster and having revenue flow in much faster is a significant achievement.

Secretary Aherne called for a vote on the motion.  The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 026-09

Secretary Aherne announced that the Commission had previously voted to continue item #’s 9, 10 and 11 and the next item would be item #12.

Vice-President Hechanova asked Director Day about the Access Appeals Commission decisions and having them available through the Department’s website or computer system.  Vice-President Hechanova said that there does not seem to be access to any data base that establishes the basis of what had been ruled fair or allowable and what had been basically declined, or at least from the standpoint of much like law libraries, there is a stack of those that have been accepted as benchmark decisions. Vice-President Hechanova stated that this should be available to homeowners, developers, and staff to basically use as a reference so that everyone would really understand the level playing field of what had been ruled as legal and valid in the past.  Director Day said that this is something she could talk to staff about and with the help of Laurence Kornfield try to find some past interpretations and put them on the website. Director Day said that the current computer program would not make them available but they could possibly be put on DBI’s website.

Commissioner Levitt said that in the discussion about the Building Inspectors there were a lot of points made about these people being first responders in an emergency, and he asked if Building Inspectors were required to live in the City.  Director Day said that they are not, but are required under State law to report to the nearest jurisdiction at the time of the event, and then they are either forwarded on to their own jurisdiction if they can get there, but they are required to respond throughout the State.

Commissioner Levitt said that the Commission heard the presentation about the Building Inspectors and said that the point was made that other jurisdictions in the area have not laid off Building Inspectors. Commissioner Levitt said that he was wondering what the number of Building Inspectors that DBI has on staff or the reduced number would be compared to, per capita, the number of Building Inspectors in a place like San Jose or how much building activity there is in San Jose versus San Francisco.  Director Day said that someone would have to examine their fund balances and do a complete survey of their department to find out how their operations work. Director Day said that DBI has a total of 45 Building Inspectors throughout the Department, and about a third of them were laid off.

Commissioner Levitt said that a lot of people right now are not getting building permits for various reasons.  Commissioner Levitt said that the Planning fees are really extraordinary in San Francisco and he thinks that contributes a lot to people being reluctant to getting building permits. Commissioner Levitt stated that this is one of the things the BIC might want to address in a Joint Meeting with Planning.  Commissioner Levitt said that there are people who want to do work but are discouraged when going to the Building Department because it kicks in a lot of Planning fees. Commissioner Levitt asked when the Joint meeting was going to happen.

Director Day said that the Joint meeting is tentatively scheduled for May 7^th and there is a basic agenda that is being worked on.  Director Day said that talking about another department's fees and how they collect fees would be the same as Planning coming in to decide how DBI collects its fees.  Director Day stated that Planning has done fee studies and had to provide nexus studies to support what they are charging, and it would be up to President Murphy to add any item to the agenda.

President Murphy said that DBI and the BIC Commissioners need input into that Joint meeting as the BIC Commissioners should have some say in what the agenda is going to be. President Murphy said that he did not want Planning and the Historic Commission making up the agenda and expecting the BIC to be there for their agenda so there should be some pre-meetings. President Murphy stated that Commissioner Walker, Commissioner Lee and he went to two meetings and said that at the second scheduled meeting they were essentially snubbed and turned away. 

Commissioner Walker asked if the Director could set up another interdepartmental and Commissioner meeting to establish the exact agenda.  Director Day said that she was trying to do that before the end of April.

Secretary Aherne said that on that note she wanted to let the Commission know that she had submitted the paperwork for getting the Board Chambers for that meeting, but there might be a glitch on May 7th.  Ms. Aherne stated that she was told that a meeting was being canceled and that the room was available, but was called yesterday and told that it might not be available. Ms. Aherne said that she had submitted the paperwork, which is extensive to get the Board Chambers and would let President Murphy and Director Day know what is happening with that just in case the date has to be changed.

President Murphy said that he had one more item to discuss regarding electrical inspections.  President Murphy used the scenario of a two or three-unit building where a contractor picks up three permits for three individual units. President Murphy said that then the Inspector shows up in the field and makes comments that the contractor should pay for three separate inspections even though it is the same building. President Murphy said that he thought there was a breakdown of communication there that the Director might want to address with Michael Hennessey.  President Murphy said that it was his understanding that the site visit is included in all three of the permits.

Director Day said that individual permits are taken out and said that what is happening in the field is that a person will come in and take out a permit; they are supposed to take out a permit for each unit. Director Day stated that the contractor can call in for inspections on three units at one time, but what is happening is that when they finish out one unit; they are calling out the inspector and the same when they finish the second and third units; that was the reason for the separate permits per unit per the electrical division.  President Murphy said that he was talking about if the contractor calls for the inspection and all three units are ready.  Director Day said that the Inspector would call on all three permits.  President Murphy asked if the contractor had to make three separate phone calls.  Director Day said that he can call all numbers at one time.  President Murphy asked if there was any way of educating the contractors on this.  Director Day said that the Department would work on that.

Secretary Aherne said that the next meeting would be the third Wednesday in May and that the Joint meeting is tentatively scheduled for May 7^th at 5:30 p.m.