Building Inspection Commission (BIC)

Regular Meeting of March 4, 1998

Adopted March 18, 1998

War Memorial Building, Room 428

401 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94102

MINUTES

The meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 1:12 p.m. by Vice-President Vasquez.

1.	ROLL CALL - Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.

COMMISSION MEMBERS/STAFF PRESENT:

Armando Vasquez, Vice-President	Mona Cereghino, Commissioner

Alfonso K. Fillon, Commissioner	Sigmund A. Freeman, Commissioner

Roy Guinnane, Commissioner	Maria Banico, Commission Secretary

COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT:

Bobbie Sue Hood, President (excused absence)

Sharon Mark, Commissioner (excused absence)

D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:

Frank Chiu, Director

James Hutchinson, Deputy Director for Permit Services

William Wong, Deputy Director for Inspection Services

Carla Johnson, Assistant to the Director

Paulette Hooey, Manager for Administrative Services Division

Roan Michaels, Manager for MIS Division

Lesley Stansfield, Chief Housing Inspector

CITY ATTORNEY'S REPRESENTATIVE:

Ilene Dick, Deputy City Attorney

2.	President's Report.

There was no report due to President Hood's absence.

3.	Director's Report.

a.	Report and discussion on a proposed Board of Supervisors resolution sponsored by Supervisor Gavin Newsom regarding window bars and door locks. The Commission may take action to direct the Director of Building Inspection to identify sources of funds, including but not limited to the Code Enforcement Rehabilitation Fund (CERF), to be used to enable low-income homeowners and tenants to install releasable bars on sleeping rooms (primarily bedrooms, but any room that is regularly used for sleeping) windows and on doors (including gated doors) in their residences.

Director Chiu said that this resolution was initially scheduled for hearing at the Board of Supervisors' Finance Committee today, however, it was continued to next week. He said that Supervisor Gavin Newsom has been working with DBI staff to look for fund sources. At this point, he felt that the Code Enforcement Rehabilitation Fund is the most appropriate fund for this program.

Vice-President Vasquez asked when the legislation might be passed.

Director Chiu said that the hearing was continued to Wednesday next week.

Commission Secretary Banico said that there are two ways to approach this matter. The BIC may wait for the Board of Supervisors to adopt the resolution, then send it over to the BIC to be forwarded to the department. Or the Commission may take a proactive approach by sending a representative or Commissioner to the next Finance Committee Meeting and declaring the BIC's position.

Vice-President Vasquez said that the proactive role makes a lot more sense.

Director Chiu said that there was research done on how much money was in the fund. He said that the department receives about $260,000 for the CERF each year.

Vice-President Vasquez asked how to communicate the BIC's support to the Finance Committee.

Director Chiu said that the purpose of this legislation is to urge the BIC and the department to find fund sources for this program. He said that he will report to the Finance Committee that the proposed legislation was discussed at the BIC Regular Meeting and both the Commission and the department support this legislation.

Ms. Roberta Caravelli, Citizen Review, reminded the Commission that 70% of housing in San Francisco is tenant occupied. She said that she has a problem with the use of public funds to subsidize landlords. The only action the Commission could do today is to direct the Director to identify fund sources including the CERF. She urged Commissioners who were not present in the last BIC meeting to listen to the tapes on the Brown Act and Sunshine Ordinance.

Commissioner Guinnane asked what the threshold was to qualify as low-income homeowners and tenants.

Director Chiu said that he does not have the figures. He said that CERF funds are not free, they are provided as low-interest loans for owner-occupied units.

Mr. Bruce Bonacker, contractor, said that the code only requires that releasable window bars and gated doors be installed in buildings with three or more units. Majority of San Franciscans live in one or two units buildings which are tenants occupied. He suggested that the BIC might want to consider applying this law to one and two-unit buildings.

In response to Commissioner Guinnane's question earlier, Director Chiu read from a brochure issued by the Mayor's Housing Authority containing a table defining low-income households. He said that the City uses a range to define low-income households: a one-person household is low-
income if the annual income is $34,000 or less, a low-income household of four person has an annual income of $49,000 or less.

Vice-President Vasquez asked if the current resolution is for low-income households and if it covers one and two- unit buildings.

Director Chiu said that the CERF program applies only to one and two-unit buildings and condominium buildings. The buildings should be owner-occupied.

Vice-President Vasquez said that he would like to agendize this item for the next BIC meeting.

b.	Monthly status report, discussion and possible action on the progress to date in upgrading DBI's computer systems and applications including but not limited to replacing the Motorola system which is currently being used for permit issuance and records management.

Deputy Director Hutchinson referred to the written report on the status of MIS' major projects distributed prior to the meeting. He said that the DBI's Information Systems Division will have a fully operational live data demonstration of the Permit Tracking System before the end of this month. The department has hired a training instructor to expedite the training of key Central Permit Bureau data entry clerks.

c.	Status report, discussion and possible action on the progress to date to define the operations and to staff the One Stop Permit Coordination Program.

Deputy Director Wong said that the department has eleven positions to fill for the One Stop Permit Coordination Program (OSPCP): a manager, five permit coordinators, four permit clerks and a secretary. The filing of applications for these positions closed last Friday. The department received 41 applications for the permit coordinator positions, 24 applications for the permit clerk positions and some applications for the secretary position. Screening, interview processes and appointments will be completed by March 20th.

Mr. Wong said that the ground floor is being remodeled. There are two areas being remodeled: the waiting/seating area near the main entrance and the area for the One Stop Permit Coordination Program. Remodeling is expected to be completed by the end of March.

Deputy Director Wong said that the operating procedures and training are currently in progress. Director Chiu has met with all the department heads on the general concept of the One Stop Permit Coordination Program. As the interim Manager of the OSPCP, he has met with the designated point persons. The operation target date is April 1, 1998.

Vice-President Vasquez asked if there were any concerns from the other departments.

Director Chiu said that he has met over several months with other departments. The general response is that it is about time that some kind of coordination is established. Most of the departments are very supportive. DPW is concerned that they will be left behind in this process.

Vice-President Vasquez said that this program is a very important undertaking. It has received attention from the Mayor as well as the Board of Supervisors. He wants to make sure that this program is implemented properly. He requested a progress report on this program at the next BIC meeting to ensure smooth operations.

Commissioner Fillon said that he would like to have a timeline with some goals since April 1st is coming fast and there is a lot to be done.

Ms. Roberta Caravelli, Citizen Review, said that the OSPCP is not helping improve the accuracy of permits issued. The OSPCP will increase the inaccuracies and the issuance of illegal permits. She cited a property at 1346 Funston Avenue as an example. On December 19, 1997 the Building Inspection Division sent a memo to the Residential Plan Check Division to hold the issuance of permits for that property. However, despite the memo, a permit was issued on December 22nd. She said that she keeps tripping over such inaccuracies without looking for them.

Mr. Ken Cleaveland, BOMA, said that BOMA represents about three hundred commercial office buildings in San Francisco and pulls out hundreds of permits each year. He said that BOMA welcomes this program with open arms. The issue of illegal construction is probably more a result of not getting permit in an expeditious manner. The One Stop Permit Coordination Program will deliver service more quickly. BOMA is in full support of this program.

d.	Quarterly status report and discussion on DBI's progress to date in implementing approved policies, timeline and action plan to address the backlog of the Housing Inspection Division's abatement cases. The Commission may take action to approve current operations or direct DBI staff to undertake new procedures and methods.

Ms. Lesley Stansfield, Chief Housing Inspector, addressed the Commission and referred to the HIS Second Quarter Report. She said that basically the HIS is on track in reducing the backlog to 839 cases from 2100 cases.

Commissioner Guinnane asked how many cases have been referred to the Franchise Tax Board.

Ms. Stansfield said that although the department has referred hundreds and thousands of cases, the database was not accurate. After talking with the Franchise Tax Board, they have only 50 cases in the database.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if it helped going through the Franchise Tax Board.

Ms. Stansfield said that there are a number of problems working with the Franchise Tax Board. For example, if they do not have the social security number of the individual, they can not pursue the case. She is trying to look for a solution, however, the procedure is not yet in place.

Commissioner Guinnane asked what problems arose out of mailing the Hotel & Apartment License Fees with the property tax and if there was a resolution to date.

Ms. Stansfield said that there were errors in the initial database and they are being corrected.

Vice-President Vasquez asked if there are guidelines in place for routine inspections of apartment and hotels.

Ms. Stansfield said that the HIS does not have the computer resources to generate inspection schedules for the routine inspections. Currently, the HIS staff has to query the database for buildings with 12 units or more and do routine inspections on buildings that have not been inspected for the last three years or more. She hopes that she will have an automated program to schedule routine inspections in the near future.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if there is a policy in place to have re-inspections after one year on apartments where violations were found.

Ms. Stansfield said she uses the same policy applied to Hotel Inspections. If the building is rated good, it will fall into the three year inspection category. If the building is rated poor, it will be inspected annually. All of the information has been set up in the computer, however, it can not operate without a program.

Vice-President Vasquez said that the number of inspections for the backlog is admirable. He urged Ms. Stansfield to keep it up.

e.	Report and discussion on the fiscal and administrative impacts of the transfer of billing and collection of Apartment License Fees from the Housing Inspection Division to the Tax Collector's Office.

Deputy Director Wong said that the Hotel & Apartment License Fees used to be collected by DBI. On September 30, 1996, the Board of Supervisors approved an ordinance authorizing collection of the Hotel & Apartment License Fees with the property tax bill. The tax bill is sent out in November and is due in two installments: December 10th and April 10th. In the previous system, the Tax Collector's Office sent out two types of bill: the first bill was sent out in September and was due on October 1st. This bill was for the Apartment License Fees which comprises 90% of the total fees collected. The department receives about $2,700,000 from these fees. The second bill was sent out in December and was due on January 1st. This bill was for the Hotel License Fees which comprises 10% of the total revenues. The amount is about $300,000.

Deputy Director Wong said that under the new system, the Tax Collector's Office requested a work order of $55,000 for services provided. Using the previous system, the average interest the department received over the years was $92,000 per year. By using the new system and taking into consideration that the fees are collected in two installments, the department is losing six months of interests. The total cost to DBI for this new procedure is about $102,000.

Mr. Wong said that according to the Tax Collector's Office, the code allows a collection of 25% penalty on any bill that is 90 days overdue. The delinquency rates under the old system ranged from 8% to 15 % which amounted to $250,000 to $400,000 per year. The Tax Collector's Office does not have staff to go after the delinquent bills. Under the new system, the license fees are collected with the property tax. The delinquency rate has dropped to 1%. The advantages of using the new system over the old system are: 1) reducing the delinquency rate, 2) eliminating the need to assign 1-2 staff to handle these fees, 3) when ownership is changed, the fee is transferable, 4) convenient to customers. Generally, the new system is cleaner and more streamlined. He said that the $55,000 fee paid to the Tax Collector's Office is fair, and is less than 2% of the fees collected.

Commissioner Guinnane asked how much the Tax Collector's Office charged under the old system.

Director Chiu said that there was no charge.

Commissioner Guinnane asked why there was a charge now.

Ms. Stansfield said that there were corrections that had to be made on the tax bill that was sent out. The corrections will be lesser over the years and smaller amount of fees need to be paid.

Commissioner Guinnane said that the old system was simple. The bill was put in envelopes and mailed.

Ms. Stansfield said that the old system was more complicated. The owner had to file an application for a Permit of Occupancy. When ownership changed, the new owner had to file for a new Permit of Occupancy and the fee was not transferable. It was done manually. There was no database. The information that the department has does not match the information that the Tax Collector's Office has. The old system was very labor intensive.

Commissioner Guinnane asked why the Tax Collector's Office does not maintain using the old system.

Deputy Director Wong said because the department was doing all the paper work. By using the new system, the whole process will be handled by the Tax Collector's Office.

Ms. Stansfield said that the Tax Collector's Office will begin to charge the department anyway regardless of which system is used. They do not provide free services anymore.

Commissioner Cereghino asked how much money was lost due to the faulty database.

Ms. Stansfield said that the corrections are in the process.

Deputy Director Wong said that the department does not know the amount.

Vice-President Vasquez asked if the procedure is in place now to address the mishap.

Ms. Stansfield said yes. Corrections are being made as they come along. There are a lot of issues to be resolved. The department has to handle each problem case by case.

Commissioner Cereghino asked how the department is making sure that this problem will not happen again.

Commissioner Vasquez said that the procedure should be in place by the next bill.

Ms. Stansfield said that the procedure for correction is in place. The Tax Collector's Office is correcting the mistakes.

Commissioner Guinnane asked how the bill was sent for condominium buildings.

Ms. Stansfield said that it was billed to individual owners.

f.	Report and discussion on the current policies and procedures on the Housing Inspection Division's records and files. The Commission may take action to direct DBI staff to draft new guidelines and procedures on records management, including but not limited to, determining which documents are to be electronically scanned and/or discarded by the Housing Inspection Division.

Deputy Director Wong referred to his report dated February 27, 1998 and said that Exhibit B of his report was a memorandum from the Director of Public Works. The memo outlined the process for retention and disposition of documents. Exhibit A contains the guidelines for file stripping and scanning of the HIS files. In response to the concerns raised by a member of the public, Mr. Wong directed the HIS division to suspend the stripping of the files to allow open discussion at this Commission meeting. He said that the purposes of imaging the documents in the computer system are to provide a paper-free environment, to allow easy access, to avoid misfiling and to save space. The project started in May 1996, 50% of the files have been imaged, 25% have been stripped and is ready to be scanned. Only 25% needs to be stripped, scanned and imaged.

Commissioner Vasquez said that he read the minutes of the last meeting. There were some concerns that documents that could be important are not being saved.

Mr. Jeremy Paul, contractor, said that he has never seen the 1994 guidelines before. He found these guidelines to be tantamount to vandalism of the record. It is beyond the experience of the individual housing inspector to understand the future uses of those documents. Small notes on the back of a document might be a contributing factor to resolve a problem. He said that it is too late to save all of the files since more than half of the City's files have been tossed out. He urged the Commission to save the rest of the documents. It does not take much space to scan all of the documents.

Ms. Edith McMillan said that for the benefit of the public, records of historical significance should not be destroyed. It is absolutely essential to retain all building permit records and plans. She commended previous chief housing inspectors, Mr. Peter Burns, Mr. Chan, and Mr. Joe Grubb for their meticulous and painstaking work in establishing the records in the Housing Inspection Services. She said that discarding historical records is not only a disservice to the community but an affront since the public has the right to expect that all records are in place and easily accessible. Duplicate records need to be kept in a safe and accessible storage place at a location other than the main offices of DBI.

Mr. Bob Bossi, contractor, addressed the Commission and requested that the Commission assure that no more records will be destroyed. The Commission should require that the Records Retention Policy used by the DBI be approved by the Commission. Section 8.3 of the Administrative Code states that records " .... may be destroyed if they no longer serve a public purpose." These records are still needed. He has conducted research for his clients using the records in the Housing Inspection Services. He would be helpless without these records. Recently, the District Attorney's Office criminally prosecuted a landlord in the death of one of his tenants and their guests. They would not have been able to proceed without researching these records. He asked the Commission to make the public's right to access these records paramount and not to destroy the rest of the records. The 25% of records that have not yet been stripped should be scanned completely. It may even be necessary to identify which documents were stapled together since many documents do not have dates. The 75% files that have been stripped should have an accompanying note in the file that states that documents had been discarded.

Mr. Bruce Bonacker, contractor, said that although this program started in May 1996, none of the public knew until recently. The public is not aware of policies that were dormant and now have been revived. He requested that the department issue a bullet list of policies that might affect the public and private sectors. He said that the City Attorney's Office might perceive the policy as legal, but it may not be convenient and in the best interest of the building owners. As a preservationist, he would like to see the maximum amount of records kept.

Mr. Roberta Caravelli, Citizen Review, said that the Charter charges the BIC to manage DBI. The only thing that this Commission can do is to get skilled managers who may not be technical experts. This policy has increased the probability for errors. She referred to the four page instructions in Exhibit A of Deputy Director Wong's report and said that although the instructions are implicit, they are incomplete. For example, they do not have instructions for cases less than two years old. The policy was carried out without the Commission's knowledge and review. During the department's Fourth Quarter Report, it was reported that there was no cost for this project. It costs DBI staff's time. She asked if the department has back-up files.

Vice-President Vasquez said that he agreed with the sentiments of the speakers especially as a member of the public who also relies on information kept in these documents. It is not in the public interest to remove information, especially in cases that have long standing code enforcement violations that dates back 30-40 years.

Commissioner Freeman said that many documents are hard to read even on the paper. He asked how much was the volume of paper kept in storage.

Deputy Director Wong said that there are about 20,000 files with an average thickness of half of an inch.

Ms. Stansfield said that Mr. Don Chan and Mr. Joe Grubb were her bosses. She has followed what they taught her. She said that there are two documents to follow: the guidelines for the inspectors and the guidelines from the City Attorney's Office. Inspectors know what the documents are, not the public. The documents that have been thrown out were duplicates and documents that are kept by other agencies. For example, plans and permits are managed by the Records Management Division. None of the historical records are being destroyed, the department is maintaining the records in a fashion that is easy to utilize.

Commissioner Cereghino asked what was being done about backups.

Ms. Stansfield said that documents that have been scanned are being kept for at least one or two years or until the department determine that the entire process is working without problems.

Commissioner Cereghino asked how much time it takes if entire files are scanned including the duplicates.

Ms. Stansfield said that it will take three to four times more than the current procedure.

Director Chiu said that Deputy Director Wong and he also reviewed the Records Retention Policy before it was implemented. He felt comfortable with the policy and confident that what HIS has been doing is proper. He talked many times with Deputy City Attorney Dick about this procedure. He would be happy to revisit the policy with the Commission. He is trying to figure out a way of eliminating the cost of warehousing these documents. He is concerned that the BIC might decide to keep everything including the duplicates because this will affect the entire department.

Vice-President Vasquez asked if there is a need to revisit the procedure.

Director Chiu said that he will be happy to scan all the rest of the HIS documents. His concern is with a blanket policy of not throwing away any document.

Mr. Mitch Mass, property owner in the Mission district, said that it is extremely time consuming to look for records. He agreed that documents should be scanned. Hard copies should be kept as well. It should not be up to bureaucrats to decide what should be scanned. The department should scan everything.

Mr. Jeremy Paul said that he appreciated Director Chiu's recommendation that the guidelines be revisited. He said that there should be public input in the process. He said that inspectors are not in a position to determine what is useful to other agencies. The correspondence in the Records Management Division record keeping and the HIS record keeping is not always correlated as it should be. There is a huge gap in the Record Management Division's files.

Ms. Edith McMillan said that she was shocked that 75% of the records have been disposed off. The cost of warehousing is a poor excuse. This process has been done administratively without following the Sunshine Ordinance. The BIC and the public were not aware of the process. The public should be informed and be given time to respond. Second copies should be kept since anything can be erased in computer files. There is a need to re-institute procedures with public input before further damage happens.

Mr. Bossi said that if it takes three times longer to scan everything, the stripping is removing more than duplicates. The guidelines state to "discard all Superintendent Hearing Notices and Decisions, Director's Hearing Notices and Declarations, all unverified/unsubstantiated complaints ...." etc. These are not duplicates. These are critical documents. The public is willing to pay a fee for retention of the records. The policy is in conflict with the Administrative Code and also has expired. The policy itself stated that it needed to be revisited in 1997.

Vice-President Vasquez asked Director Chiu what his recommendations were.

Director Chiu said that he will work with the City Attorney's Office, solicit public input by perhaps forming a Task Force, and will report back to the Commission. He does not know what the time frame is. In the meantime, he suggested keeping the current policy until a new one is in place.

4.	Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.

Ms. Roberta Caravelli thanked Vice-President Vasquez for the way he has chaired this meeting with fairness and consideration to the public.

Mr. Ken Cleaveland, BOMA, requested that item #7 be considered next since there were many people who want to speak on the bulletins.

Mr. Bruce Bonacker said that he is still being billed by Book Publishing Company for the 1995 Building Code amendments. Since he has not paid this bill, Book Publishing Company is withholding his Planning Code amendments. He requested that this matter be resolved soon.

Deputy Director Hutchinson said that he will prepare a report for the Commission for the next meeting.

Ms. Edith McMillan suggested that appeals for the Abatement Appeals Board should be calendared at the end of the Commission's Regular Meeting. The public should not be inconvenienced for the benefit of a few individuals.

Commissioner Vasquez said that this was a good recommendation.

(The Commission took Item #7 at this point in the proceedings and returned to item #5 below after the break.)

5.	Report and discussion on the allocation of funds collected from penalties and judgments against property owners involved in code enforcement cases filed by the City Attorney's Office on behalf of the Department of Building Inspection.

Deputy City Attorney Dick referred to the written report prepared by the City Attorney's Office Chief Financial Officer. The report consists of two parts, the City Attorney collections for DBI and the collections for DBI and all other departments. She said that penalties collected under the Business and Professions Code are deposited to the General Fund.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if there is a reimbursement from the General Fund for the legal fees incurred by DBI on cases where penalties were awarded under the Business and Professions Code.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that there is no reimbursement pursuant to statute. Under the Business and Professions Code, there is a $2,500 penalty for each violation. The court often awards civil penalties for the Building and Housing Codes violations.

Vice-President Vasquez asked how the court determines whether penalties should go to the General Fund or to the department.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that it is based on arguments. The court then comes up with allocations.

Commissioner Cereghino asked in the Sainez case, if the penalties awarded go to the General Fund and if DBI will be compensated for all the expenses incurred in that case.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that the penalties have not yet been paid. The judge used his discretion on the allocations of penalties. She will provide a copy of Sainez judgment to the Commission.

Commissioner Cereghino said that this case attracted a lot of public interest. She would like to receive a copy of the judgment.

Commissioner Freeman said that in the case of the City against a member of the public, the judge decides the allocation of the penalties: whether it goes to the City Attorney's Office to cover the attorney's fees, or to the General Fund, or to the department. However, if an individual wins a suit, that person decides the allocation of the award he has won.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that only public prosecutors can go against a public nuisance under the Business and Professions Code.

Commissioner Freeman asked for a clarification.

Deputy City Attorney said that the court will award attorney's fees for the Building and Housing code violations to the City Attorney's Office. Attorney's fees are used as offset to the City Attorney's billings to DBI. However, under the Business and Professions Code, the penalties go to the General Fund and the charge under the Business and Professions Code that something is a public nuisance can only be filed by a public prosecutor.

Commissioner Freeman said that the department spent a considerable amount on legal fees over a period of years and some of the judgments awarded go to the General Fund.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that there have been civil penalties that went to the department.

Vice-President Vasquez said that according to the report prepared by the City Attorney's Office from July to date, the only penalties awarded that went to the General Fund was for 1080 Folsom Street amounting to $25,000. There should be more Building and Housing Code violation penalties that will go to the department.

Deputy City Attorney Dick agreed. She said that she will provide statistics to the BIC.

Vice-President Vasquez said that the City Attorney's Office might want to persuade the court to look at allocating the money to fix the property instead of going to the General Fund.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that this could be done.

Commissioner Vasquez said that it would be useful to know what options are available for the Commission to take.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that it would mean that the BIC staff will be involved in preparing cases.

Commissioner Cereghino asked if the City Attorney makes recommendation to the judge.

Deputy City Attorney Dick said that the judge is bound by statute.

Commissioner Cereghino asked if it is possible to get a report on the allocation of penalties for the last two years.

Commissioner Freeman said that it is hard to decide when the Commission or the department should be aggressive in handling a case since the Commission does not know whether the judgment will go to the department or the General Fund.

6.	Report, discussion and possible action regarding the January 1998 billing and expenditures for City Attorney's Office' services to the Building Inspection Commission and/or the Department of Building Inspection.

Ms. Paulette Hooey addressed the Commission and said that the department spent $65,000 in January for the City Attorney's Office' services.

Vice-President Vasquez said that this was consistent with the previous reports. He thanked Ms. Hooey for the report.

7.	Report, discussion and possible action to adopt three administrative bulletins (listed below) proposed by the Department of Building Inspection. Pursuant to the BIC Rules, DBI staff circulated the drafts and held public meetings to receive input on these proposed bulletins.

Deputy Director Wong said that these Administrative Bulletins were approved by the BIC with some revisions in July 1997. These final drafts have also been reviewed by the Code Advisory Committee and the Disability Access Advisory Committee. The Code Advisory Committee recommends that the BIC adopt these Administrative Bulletins. He thanked the Commission, the CAC, the DAAC, all interested parties and his staff for their hard work in developing these bulletins. Mr. Wong gave an explanation of these Administrative Bulletins and recommended that the Commission adopt them.

Mr. Ken Cleaveland said that BOMA has been working with the DBI for years to help develop administrative bulletins to expedite the interpretation of codes especially on disability access. These Administrative Bulletins are needed to interpret and to expedite the process of complying with the Building Codes. Many members of BOMA have spent many hours with the Disability Access Advisory Committee and the department staff to develop these bulletins. He would like to see the department develop a book consisting of all the Administrative Bulletins for public use. He recommended adoption of the Administrative Bulletins.

Mr. Rob McNeil, chairman of BOMA Disabled Access Task Force, said that the Code Advisory Committee has spent a lot of effort in examining these bulletins. It is not onerous for building owners to provide disability access. He said that as a contractor, these bulletins are succinct and easy to follow. He recommended approval of the bulletins.

Ms. Linda Carter, architect, said that she was also involved in the development of these bulletins. She found that the bulletins expedite the process. She recommended the passage of the Administrative Bulletins.

Commissioner Cereghino said that she supports the idea of having the bulletins available on demand.

Vice-President Vasquez concurred. He thanked everyone who was involved in this process. He said that the Commission's goal is to address as many disability access issues as possible.

a.	Proposed administrative bulletin to allow the use of powered door operators as an equivalent facilitation to required door side clearances (Administrative Bulletin No. AB-11.98).

Deputy Director Wong said there is a minor typo error under References, Section 1105B, ".... group 3 occupancies" should be " .... group B ...."

Commissioner Cereghino moved, seconded by Commissioner Freeman, to adopt the Administrative Bulletin No. AB-011.98 as corrected.

The motion passed unanimously. [Resolution No. BIC-024.98]

b.	Proposed administrative bulletin to allow the use of powered door operators as an equivalent facilitation to required level landings at doors (Administrative Bulletin No. AB-12.98).

Commissioner Cereghino moved, seconded by Commissioner Freeman and Commissioner Guinnane, to adopt the Administrative Bulletin No. AB-012.98 as proposed.

The motion passed unanimously. [Resolution No. BIC-025.98]

c.	Proposed administrative bulletin to establish procedures for the review of disabled access alternative provisions under the State Historical Building Code (Administrative Bulletin No. AB-13.98).

Commissioner Cereghino moved, seconded by Commissioner Freeman and Commissioner Guinnane, to adopt the Administrative Bulletin No. AB-013.98 as proposed.

The motion passed unanimously. [Resolution No. BIC-026.98]

The Commission took a break at this point in the proceedings from 2:55 to 3:17 p.m.

8.	Commissioner Inquiries and Review of Communication Items: At this time, the Commission may make inquiries to staff regarding the status of various documents, policies, practices and procedures which are of interest to the Commission and may discuss communication items received since the last Commission meeting.

Commissioner Cereghino proposed to form a subcommittee on the proposed ordinance for the BIC Appellate Powers.

Vice-President Vasquez agreed.

Commission Secretary said that this item needs to be agendized before the Commission can take such action.

Vice-President Vasquez commended the department on the letters received from the Los Angeles Building Department.

9.	Review and approval of the Minutes of the BIC Regular Meeting of February 18, 1998.

Commissioner Guinnane moved to adopt the minutes of the BIC Regular Meeting of February 18, 1998 as prepared.

The motion passed unanimously. [Resolution No. BIC-027.98]

10.	Discussion and possible action with respect to those items that could be placed on the agenda of March 18, 1998 BIC Regular Meeting and other future meetings.

Commissioner Cereghino reiterated her request for the proposed subcommittee on BIC Appellate Power.

Vice-President Vasquez said that the Resolution for the window bars will also be calendared.

Commissioner Guinnane asked if he could get an up-date on the houses at 770, 800 and 828 El Camino Del Mar.

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 testimony received at this point in the proceedings.

12.	Adjournment.

There being no other business, and on a motion made by Commissioner Cereghino, seconded by Commissioner Guinnane, the meeting adjourned at 3:50 p.m.

The motion passed by unanimous vote. [Resolution No. BIC-028.98]

________________________________

MARIA BANICO

Commission SecretaryÇã