|
1.
|
Call to Order and Roll Call – Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.
|
|
|
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENTS:
|
|
|
Debra Walker, President
Joe Grubb, Commissioner
Criss Romero, Commissioner
Michael Theriault, Commissioner
|
Frank Lee, Vice-President
Mel Murphy, Commissioner
Vahid Sattary, Commissioner
|
|
|
Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary
|
|
|
D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:
|
|
|
Isam Hasenin, Director
Bill Strawn, Communications Manager
Sonya Harris, Secretary
|
|
|
CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE REPRESENTATIVES:
John Malamut, Deputy City Attorney
|
|
|
Presidents Announcements
President Walker said that she wanted to express appreciation to the outgoing leadership that came in last year. President Walker stated that the Department is now going through a reorganization process with a new Director, and said she wanted to officially thank Amy Lee who stepped in as Interim Director, and Carla Johnson, Wing Lau, and Taras Madison who stepped in to manage the financial aspects of the Department. President Walker expressed her gratitude to Wing Lau who was retiring on Friday. President Walker said that the Board of Supervisors gave a commendation to Carla Johnson yesterday for her many years of ongoing service to DBI and in honor of Pride Week and Pride Month.
President Walker stated that Commissioner Romero is the proud owner of a new home, and he previously sat on the tenant’s seat so the Board of Supervisor’s President Peskin switched her and Commissioner Romero’s seats. President Walker said that she is now representing the Tenant Seat and Commissioner Romero is now representing the General Public Seat.
|
|
|
Discussion and possible action to appoint/reappoint and swear in members of the Access Appeals Commission.
|
|
|
a.
|
Ms. Alyce Brown for the seat of a person with physical disability (reappoint), term to expire 11/01/09.
|
|
|
b.
|
Mr. Arnie Lerner for the seat of member experienced in construction (reappoint), term to expire 11/01/10.
|
|
|
c.
|
Ms. Roslyn Baltimore for the seat of public member (reappoint to AAC, but formerly serving on the seat of member experienced in construction), term to expire 11/01/09.
|
|
|
d.
|
Mr. Walter Park appointment for the seat of a person with physical disability, term to expire 11/01/09.
|
|
|
e.
|
Mr. Jurgen Dostert appointment for seat of member experienced in construction, term to expire 11/01/10.
|
|
|
President Walker stated that the Access Appeals Commission hears appeals regarding disability access that come through DBI, and is a very important body, making very important decisions so the BIC really appreciates all of the people who applied. President Walker said that she wanted to thank all of the Commissioners who reviewed the applicants.
Vice-President Lee said that he, Commissioner Theriault, and Commissioner Grubb met in committee last month. Vice-President Lee stated that everyone’s resume was reviewed and the Committee took a hard look at what they wanted to do as a Commission. Vice-President Lee said the idea was to move forward, get fresh ideas and fresh people’s view on subject matters that were pertinent to the committees, and balance that out with historical memory. Vice-President Lee stated that the Committee wanted people that knew how things worked in the City as well as new people that would give the Commission a fresh look at things, so five people were recommended. Vice-President Lee read the names of the five proposed members.
President Walker called for Commissioner’s comments. President Walker said that she noticed that Ms. Baltimore was switching from a construction seat to a general public seat, and asked if the sub-committee had a conversation about this because a general public seat is not someone in the construction business. Commissioner Theriault stated that they looked at Ms. Baltimore’s resume which included experience in real estate, and real estate development rather than what most people would consider construction involvement. Commissioner Theriault said that Ms. Baltimore’s resume did not involve engineering, architecture, or contracting. Commissioner Theriault stated that there were very strong candidates with intense construction backgrounds that the sub-committee thought were suited to the construction seat, and they thought that Ms. Baltimore was more suited to a general public seat. Commissioner Theriault said that there were two other candidates for the general public seat, but the sub-committee looked at having continuity within the committee so that Ms. Baltimore’s knowledge from having participated was important.
President Walker asked Ms. Baltimore to come forward to speak to this question, as she had heard some concerns from the disability community.
Ms. Roslyn Baltimore said that she previously shared with Commissioner Grubb that she had been accused of representing the public seat because she tended to see both sides of the issue, and said that she had previously served as a Planning Commissioner. Ms. Baltimore stated that she tries to do her homework and looks at both sides of an issue to come to a conclusion not based on bias. President Walker asked if Ms. Baltimore was involved in construction projects at this point. Ms. Baltimore said that she is involved in a development project, which may or may not go forward since the market has changed.
Commissioner Theriault said that he wanted to comment about the general principle of public seats, and said that he believed that the public seat is open to any possible participant. Commissioner Theriault stated that the fact that there is a construction seat on a particular body does not say the public seat cannot be filled with somebody of construction background or knowledge. Commissioner Theriault said that someone does not need to be ignorant of construction to serve on the public seat as far as he can determine, and it sometimes seems helpful to have someone with a better depth of knowledge in that public seat.
President Walker said that on all Commissions it is important for the members to remember who they are representing.
President Walker called for public comment.
Ms. Jakkee Bryson said that she was at the meeting in the company of her walker, which she calls her Gavin Newsom walker. Ms. Bryson said that she wanted to address the inappropriateness of appointing Walter Park to this committee. Ms. Bryson stated that Walter Park is responsible in a large part for her being relegated to a walker. Ms. Bryson said that she missed being relegated to an electric wheel chair by one week, due to persistence on her part and her doctor who listened to what she was saying and did not see her as a Medi-Cal cash cow. Ms. Bryson stated that she was languishing in the shelter system and was filing complaint after complaint with the office which kept morphing, so that she felt like she was in a Dean Koontz book without a script. Ms. Bryson said the office is now the Mayor’s Office On Disability, but it was something else then and she was being treated very badly by City Hall which kept moving the office around. Ms. Bryson stated that she filed a complaint during the summer of 1999 when Willie Brown was up for reelection. Ms. Bryson said that Walter Park was the Director of the Mayor’s Office On Disability at the time, but this was a different Walter Park than the one she encountered in April of 1999. Ms. Bryson stated that the Episcopal Sanctuary applied for a hardship exemption and did not want to come into compliance with upgrading the freight elevator for passengers to assist people like her; in those days she did not need a cane but had orthotics. Ms. Bryson said that when she applied for relief through the Mayor’s Office On Disability she got chided by Walter Park and he went so far as to invite the respondent, Lynn Armstrong who represented Episcopal Sanctuary, to be part of his committee to write the countywide ADA compliant reasonable accommodation policy. Ms. Bryson stated that she never received the results of Mr. Park’s investigation and when she asked Susan Mizner, the current Director of the Mayor’s Office On Disability, for a copy of her file the majority of the correspondence between her and Walter Park, and the Episcopal Sanctuary was missing. Ms. Bryson said that the findings were missing as well, and stated that she did not think it would be a good idea to have Mr. Park back on the Access Appeals Commission. Ms. Bryson said that Mr. Park’s actions are going to be investigated.
Commissioner Murphy made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero to appoint all five members (Alyce Brown, Arnie Lerner, Roslyn Baltimore, Walter Park, and Jurgen Dostert) to The Access Appeals Commission. The motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC 040-07
President Walker administered the Oath of Office to Arnie Lerner, Roslyn Baltimore, Walter Park, and Jurgen Dostert, (Alyce Brown was not present and will be sworn in at a later date).
|
|
|
Director’s Reports.
a. Status of MIS.
Director Hasenin reported that the Department is continuing to assess the existing automation systems and the Department’s IT needs. Director Hasenin stated that DBI had a presentation from the City of San Diego Development Services Department staff to look at what their system was doing. Director Hasenin said that San Diego spent a lot of years developing their system that captures the entire development review process which includes Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Building. Director Hasenin stated that he thought it would be helpful for DBI to look at what San Diego has done with their computer system to give DBI an idea of what is needed in San Francisco. Director Hasenin said that he is working with the Planning Department to develop an RFQ to look at what options there are for off the shelf type systems. Director Hasenin stated that he has instructed the MIS staff to make enhancements to the current system and make changes that would make the system effective and user friendly. Director Hasenin said that the Department would be making some decisions in the next few months.
President Walker stated that she has heard really good things from people in the construction industry and the public about the process reengineering discussions. Director Hasenin said that he would report more on that under a different item. President Walker asked what the time frame was for the RFQ. Director Hasenin stated that the Planning Department was taking the lead on this, but said he anticipates that it would be done very soon. Director Hasenin said that the RFQ is a less complicated process than a full RFP and it would give the Department a feel for what systems are available, what they do, the costs, and so on.
Commissioner Theriault said that there is a developer in town, Nat Bosa, who has done major work in San Diego and San Francisco so it might be interesting to hear his point in comparing both of the Building Departments. Director Hasenin stated that it would be an interesting perspective and he would follow up on that.
Commissioner Murphy asked how long it would take to get DBI’s offices finished and when would staff get better accommodations, since he visited the Planning Department and they have incredible digs all paid for by DBI. Director Hasenin said that the Planning Department has evacuated two floors in the building which gave DBI more space, but the immediate goal is to improve on the permit center operation which is on the first floor. Director Hasenin stated that when the first floor o 1640 Mission Street became available, the Department took that over and is working with the Architectural Bureau to get it completed. Director Hasenin said that he was hoping the project could be done in a few weeks but things take time, and said he anticipates that the 1640 office space would be completed by the end of the year. Director Hasenin stated that the first floor operation at 1660 Mission is going to be moved to 1640 Mission, and at the same time there is a committee of staff looking at the proper use for the entire building at 1660. Director Hasenin said that he wants to have a big picture plan before moving people to different floors. Director Hasenin stated that different issues are coming up such as what is an appropriate size office for a plan checker, building inspector, and so on. Director Hasenin said that he wants to eliminate customers having to go up and down to different floors in the building. Director Hasenin stated that it is going to be a major expense for DBI, but said it should be done once and done right. Commissioner Murphy asked if DBI was getting support from the Real Estate Department. Director Hasenin said that the Department of Real Estate has been supportive. President Walker said that maybe in the next few months the BIC could agendize an update on the design of the building.
b. Performance Statistics.
Director Hasenin said that he did not have a report at this time, but this is a standard item which the Department is looking at our performance standards and changing them to be more accurate and reflective of the work load and the needs of the industry, the political environment, and the Commission. Director Hasenin stated that he would come back to the Commission in the next few months with an update on the criteria.
c. Financial Report.
Director Hasenin gave a summary of the financial report and stated that the Department would be using $6.1M from the fund balance, but it was budgeted to use $8.4M so it is not as bad as anticipated. Director Hasenin stated that the Department would monitor expenses, but if things continue this way next year then DBI might have to look at the fee structure.
President Walker stated that she wanted to talk about a work order for the Health Department regarding the SRO collaborative funding because she heard from the public that the Health Department may have cut those funds, but DBI continues to give them money so the Director may want to look into this.
d. Update on interdepartmental coordination meetings and recommendations.
Director Hasenin stated that the Statement of Incompatible Activities (SIA) is in the final stages at this point, but the Ethics Commission has the final document. Director Hasenin said that the Department is addressing comments that were received from the unions, and the Ethics Commission will be hearing DBI’s SIA in July, but it would not become effective until all of the different statements for the City as a whole are approved. President Walker said there was a Code of Conduct for Commissioners and asked Secretary Aherne if it was sent to all of the Commissioners. Secretary Aherne stated that she needed a copy from President Walker, and President Walker stated that a copy should be sent to all Commissioners in the next BIC packet.
e. Update on Community Action Plan for Seismic Safety (CAPSS).
Director Hasenin said that the CAPSS Program was done in multiple steps over the last few years, a few of the phases were completed, and then there was a hold put on the program. Director Hasenin stated that recently CAPSS was brought back and initiated by this Commission to re-start it and there was a contract written with Applied Technology Council (ATC) to proceed with the progress of the program. Director Hasenin said that he decided to take a look at the details of the CAPSS Program to make sure that it fits within DBI’s goals and objectives. Director Hasenin stated that he met with people from ATC and would be meeting with President Walker to go over his thoughts and recommendations on how to proceed with the CAPSS Program. Director Hasenin stated that then it could be decide on how to proceed and he would come back to the full Commission with a decision or recommendation. Commissioner Sattary asked Director Hasenin to give a briefing of his assessment of what has been done with the CAPSS Program. Director Hasenin said that 80% to 90% of the socioeconomic part was done and hazard categories of buildings such as soft story or wood framed buildings were being worked on. Director Hasenin said that DBI already initiated a process to start looking at soft story buildings and said that he wanted to make sure that the money being spent is worth it. Commissioner Murphy asked if there was a lot of money spent and he said that the Commission may want to consider canceling the CAPSS Program again and have the Department do its own study. President Walker said that there is outside funding for seismic safety that can not be spent on anything else since it is earmarked for that purpose, so DBI should look into that first.
g. Update on Business Process Re-engineering
Director Hasenin stated that the Building Inspection Commission directed the Department to do an RFP for a Business Process Reengineering plan about a year ago, but it came back with a high cost to hire a consulting firm to do the work. Director Hasenin said that he decided the Department could do the Business Process Reengineering with its own resources instead of spending $2 million dollars. Director Hasenin stated that he did this in San Diego so he has set up an executive steering committee to manage the process for the entire effort. Director Hasenin said that this effort is being sponsored by the Mayor’s Office and there are Directors involved from different departments such as: Planning, Fire, Public Works, Health, the Redevelopment Agency, and others. Director Hasenin said that DBI is also involving stakeholders, customers, and organizations such as: The AIA, BOMA, and the RBA in the process. Director Hasenin stated that he set up four subcommittees that would do the leg work and they are: Plan Review and Permit Issuance, Inspection Services, Performance Measures, and Automation. Director Hasenin said that he anticipates an overall timeline of about four to five months, which is an aggressive timeline but he said he wanted to keep meeting and making progress. Director Hasenin stated that this is a huge amount of time and commitment from staff and volunteers but said he believed it will result in a good process. Director Hasenin said that the subcommittees will make recommendations for improvements and report to the executive committee; the Director will apprise the Commission of the progress and bring forth a final report for the Commission to review and approve.
President Walker asked if Director Hasenin factored in the logistical, space build out issue. Director Hasenin said yes the committee would do so and he explained the detailed process they would go through. Director Hasenin stated that limiting the number of application forms, as well as the number of steps in the process customers have to go through are some issues that are being addressed. Commissioner Sattary asked who does the coaching for the Business Process Reengineering. Director Hasenin said that the facilitators are Bill Strawn and Patty Herrera, and said he did not have to go outside to find facilitators since only DBI staff would know the nuts and bolts of the process, in addition to staff and customers. Commissioner Sattary asked Director Hasenin if he considered hiring a coach for a 1-day seminar on how to lay out the process and set up a formula. Director Hasenin stated that he was considering having a person from San Diego come help out later on. Commissioner Murphy said that he was excited about the changes and the unbelievable work that is going on in the Department, and that Director Hasenin is doing an incredible job.
h. Update on Expanded Over-the Counter Plan Check Services.
Director Hasenin stated that the Department has expanded over-the-counter plan check services because the first thing he noticed when he did his initial assessment of the Department is there was a limit to what could be done as an over-the-counter review. Director Hasenin said that before customers submitted their plans and staff routed them to other places in the Department for review but there are a lot of steps involved in that process. Director Hasenin stated that ideally if the plan review is done as an over-the-counter service, as the customer waits and maintains ownership and possession of their plans the fewer steps there will be in-house. Director Hasenin said that he has started a new program where any plan that takes an hour or less of a plan review by any one discipline that qualifies as an over-the-counter plan check can be reviewed at the counter. Director Hasenin stated that there are teams of plan checkers on the fourth floor to process the plans and the idea is to have fewer plans taken in which allows more time for the bigger jobs, and the ability to be able to do reviews in a more expeditious manner. Director Hasenin said that staff has had some hiccups in the process but are addressing issues as they come up.
Commissioner Murphy asked if the Director was going to change the process for homeowners doing kitchen, bathroom, or small remodels. Commissioner Murphy said that now the homeowner has to get separate electrical and plumbing permits, and it would be a good idea to have one permit where the homeowner pays one fee to activate all permits. Director Hasenin stated that as part of the business process reengineering, this is one of the issues DBI will be working on, specifically trying to reduce the “hand off” of customers to different locations. Director Hasenin explained in detail how the new over-the-counter process worked. Director Hasenin said that there is a possibility of having premium plan check services where customers would have to pay a fee for expedited service.
|
|
|
Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission’s jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.
Mr. Henry Karnilowicz said that there was an article in the San Francisco Chronicle that basically vindicated DBI, and validates that the past of DBI was not as it had been portrayed in the media. Mr. Karnilowicz stated that he commended Mr. Ed Sweeney and Mr. Joe Duffy for their professionalism and integrity during this difficult period at DBI. Mr. Karnilowicz said this really clears the air and the clouds that have been hanging over the Department and all the building inspectors and other staff who work there. Mr. Karnilowicz stated that it gives a mandate to the Director to move on and make DBI a good place to work, and a good place for its customers to do business. Mr. Karnilowicz said that it was great to see this article and it was a victory for DBI.
|
|
|
Discussion and possible action to adopt Administrative Bulletin (AB-083) regarding Requirements and Guidelines for the Seismic Design and Review of New Tall Buildings using Non-Prescriptive Seismic-Design Procedures. [Manager Raymond Lui, Structural Safety & Emergency Management Division]
Mr. Ray Lui stated that AB-083 is the Administrative Bulletin for guidelines of the design of new tall buildings using prescriptive methods, and over half a year process has gone into putting this document together. Mr. Lui said that DBI in collaboration with the Structural Engineers Association of Northern California (SEAONC) and others, including Commissioner Sattary put many hours into developing this. Mr. Lui stated that he wanted to personally thank the Board of Directors and the AB-083 Tall Building Task Force Seismology Committees for their hard work. Mr. Lui said that the Commission has Draft #7, which is hopefully the last draft, and this administrative bulletin would go into effect for any building greater than 160 feet. Mr. Lui explained how AB-083 would affect the Code, and thanked the CAC and SEAONC for their letters approving this document.
President Walker said that she wanted to thank Mr. Lui and the Code Advisory Committee for all of their hard work, and members of the public who are interested in this as well. Commissioner Sattary stated that this document relates to a class of tall buildings that fall under the non-prescriptive design process, and the document is based on setting the guidelines for design and evaluation. Commissioner Sattary said that the design would always be subject to peer review which gives a great comfort level with the design process for these tall buildings since they are going to be subject to very rigorous analysis.
Commissioner Grubb stated that this bulletin is being adopted within the framework of the current Code, and asked if it was going to have to be revisited with the adoption of the new Code next year. Mr. Lui said that it would need to be revisited with the adoption of the new Code and certain section numbers will have to change, but the Department will look at that when the time comes. Vice-President Lee asked if the sponsor was responsible for paying for the peer review panelists. Mr. Lui said yes this was the case, but the panelists still have to answer to the Department and the Director. Commissioner Murphy thanked the engineers who worked on AB-083, the Director, and Commissioner Sattary. Commissioner Murphy said that this reflects the state of the art consensus document in the architectural community and others will look at this to adopt as a guide for dealing with their issues.
President Walker called for public comment.
Mr. Jim Guthrie stated that he was the structural representative on the CAC and Chair of the Structural Sub-Committee of the CAC, and came to lend support of this AB. Mr. Guthrie thanked everybody involved especially Ray Lui. Mr. Guthrie stated that the process was very good since it involved the staff and SEAONC, as well as engineers that do this kind of work and said that the CAC urges its approval.
Mr. Doug Hohbach, President of SEAONC, said that the letter his organization sent reflects their opinion and they are in full support of the Commission’s adoption of this document. Mr. Hohbach stated that he came to the meeting in case during the Commissioner’s discussion period they needed an independent viewpoint from a structural engineer outside of the city environment. Mr. Hohbach said that as far as he can tell it sounds like things have been well represented and SEAONC is very happy to support the City on this matter.
Commissioner Theriault made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Murphy to adopt AB-083.
The motion carried unanimously.
BIC RESOLUTION NO. 041-07
|
|
|
Discussion of report issued by the Office of the Controller dated May 24, 2007 regarding DBI employees using information gained on the job to buy property being an isolated incident. [President Walker]
President Walker stated that there were some issues that came up in the Department around Code Enforcement and staff ending up owning property. President Walker said that the Commission initiated an audit request through the Controller’s Office to look at all of the data available about building ownership and employees. President Walker stated that the Controller’s Office did an intensive review of the information and the report indicated there was only one situation where that was the case. President Walker said that the information available indicated there is not a systemic occurrence or problem in the Department. President Walker stated that the Controller’s Office learned a lot from this study and probably will be using it across the City to make sure there are ongoing audits and no inappropriate activity.
Director Hasenin said that he was pleased with the results of the report and stated that it vindicated the Department and the staff. Director Hasenin stated that there were a couple of recommendations that he agreed with a hundred percent, and DBI is going to set up a process to track ownership and transfers of ownership in real estate properties by staff as well as Commissioners.
Vice-President Lee stated that he was glad there was only one situation where this happened and said that the audit did not find wrongdoing on the part of the person that bought the property. Vice-President Lee said nevertheless he agrees that the Department should take measures not to give the impression that staff is gaining from the knowledge that they have as Department employees. Vice-President Lee stated that he would recommend that DBI goes forward with the Ethics Commission’s recommendation.
Commissioner Murphy stated that DBI made the headlines of the front page so many times, but there is a small bit on the sixth page of the newspaper about the Department’s case that was on trial, and the person was acquitted. Commissioner Murphy said that there were a couple of inspectors involved throughout that whole process and it came out that they clearly did the right thing by going back to the job in question, and insisted the contractor and owner get additional permits. Commissioner Murphy stated that it is a big plus for DBI and a win-win for the Department.
Commissioner Sattary asked what was the staff’s reaction or feedback to the report. Commissioner Sattary asked if staff had been advised of this, and if there were comments from the unions. Director Hasenin said that he sent a memo to staff as soon as this became public knowledge. Director Hasenin stated that he let staff know the results and had not gotten any negative feedback from the unions either. Director Hasenin said that hopefully over time people will give DBI the benefit of the doubt, and see that a lot of things were unfounded and move on.
President Walker stated that the Building Inspection Commission is a part of the Statement or Code of Conduct, and the Commissioners have the same expectations as staff. Commissioner Murphy said that for the record the names of the two people involved were Inspectors Duffy and Sweeney. President Walker stated that Senior Inspector Carla Johnson was a witness as well.
|
|
|
Update on meeting held with DBI staff requested by Commissioner Murphy regarding 3-R reports. [Commissioner Murphy]
Commissioner Murphy said that he met with three or four DBI staff members and that Carla Johnson, Ed Sweeney, a representative from Planning, and Henry Karnilowicz were present. Commissioner Murphy stated that Patty Herrera gave the presentation. Commissioner Murphy said that it gets back to the daunting job that the new Director has of bringing the Department from the dark ages into the 21st century. Commissioner Murphy stated that he did not realize when somebody calls in for a 3-R report that staff has to go through files and pull reels, but it was explained to him so now he is a little more educated on the process of coming up with the information. Commissioner Murphy said that he realizes why the documents are not accurate when people get them and sometimes are not worth the paper they are printed on. Commissioner Murphy stated that he asked about getting the documents computerized and possibly linked up with the Water Department because they have the best records as far as old buildings are concerned. Commissioner Murphy said that the possible turn around time to receive 3-R reports is two weeks, and this would be okay if the information received was accurate, but it is not. Commissioner Murphy stated that it would be nice if six months from now there could be more staff in that division, so that a real estate broker could call in, give their I.D. number, pay with a credit card over the phone and get the 3-R report within 24 hours. Commissioner Murphy said that this would be the ultimate goal and would make a lot of customers very happy. Commissioner Murphy stated that staff is working on the process and everybody is trying hard, but the Department is not quite where it should be.
Director Hasenin stated that he agreed with Commissioner Murphy but said that this is a difficult issue for many reasons because a lot of the records are inaccurate, which is typical of big cities that have a lot of older buildings. Director Hasenin said that staff runs into the political issue of illegal units and the questions and issues are political and not in DBI’s jurisdiction. Director Hasenin stated that he wants to staff this division at a higher level and hopefully the BPR committee will have some recommendations, because automating existing records is a very expensive effort. Director Hasenin said that he would have to look at the costs, and fees may have to be raised if customers want enhanced services. Commissioner Murphy stated that this service should be available for cases where a property is in escrow and needs to be closed and agents are waiting on one piece of paper.
Commissioner Sattary said that he could attest to how difficult it is to retrieve certain documents, because he was working on a large commercial building built in the 70’s and went to the archives and there were large volumes of applications and other papers but not a single drawing. Commissioner Sattary stated that a lot of records from thirty years ago are not complete, and to put together complete archives would be a time consuming task, but said this is a very important issue.. Commissioner Sattary said that DBI should start working on this process now so that it is available for people in the future.
President Walker stated that the Commission supports working on the process and the Department will have to deal with the fact of inadequate records as they come up. President Walker said that it is a good solution to have a normal process and maybe identify an expedited process and charge accordingly.
President Walker called for public comment.
Mr. Henry Karnilowicz thanked Director Hasenin and Commissioner Murphy for letting him participate in the meeting regarding 3-R reports. Mr. Karnilowicz stated that records management is a complex situation because he researched hundreds of permits and there is no constancy on any property—the information is all over the place. Mr. Karnilowicz said that it takes professionals to research the documents and the process needs to be streamlined but it will not happen over night. Mr. Karnilowicz stated that work needs to be put into this process and as Commissioner Murphy said, with realtors in particular who receive a 3-R report that states that the use is unknown it causes problems with an escrow. Mr. Karnilowicz said that he is not quite happy the way the process is set up and said the Department should try to get people from the real estate industry to participate in this process to make it better.
|
|
|
Discussion and possible action to establish goals, objectives, and evaluation criteria for the Director of Building Inspection.
President Walker stated that the Commission had just gone through the process of hiring a new Director and said it is important to actually put the BIC’s performance criteria and goals in a written form so that the Commission could do an evaluation and respond accordingly. President Walker said that she handed out a list of performance goals for the first year that was put together by Director Hasenin. President Walker stated that all of the Commissioners have gone through the interview process and talked with Director Hasenin, so this was his list of items that reflect all of the information that the Commissioners have input and the Director has already committed to. President Walker said that she passed out a form that is used by the Department of Human Resources (DHR) for performance plans and appraisals, and once the Commission agrees on the criteria it can be put on the form so that the Commission has a process for evaluating the Director. President Walker stated that Secretary Aherne would transfer the Director’s evaluation criteria onto the DHR form, and asked for input from the other Commissioners.
Commissioner Sattary asked how the performance plan would be used. President Walker said that when the Commission goes into Closed Session to do the Director’s evaluation it is helpful to have a form that they can assess. Commissioner Sattary stated that he would like to suggest that the Commissioners have another form that some of the people who directly work with the Director can fill out to give feedback. Commissioner Sattary said that this would not be an appraisal but staff feedback, and the Commission would have to consider how this could be done. Commissioner Sattary stated that confidentiality or matters of not disclosing names would be important, and this information would give feedback for the Commission to evaluate.
Commissioner Romero said that there is not a DHR form for staff feedback, and said that his hesitation would be that people would take the opportunity because they are anonymous to use it as a fight session against the person who does their evaluations as well. Commissioner Romero said that he looks at the appraisal form as more of a guide because it has been his experience, as a representative in the City, that unfortunately many departments do not do evaluations until they want to start documenting the work of employees. Commissioner Romero stated that this is not the case with Director Hasenin, as there was an evaluation with former Director Amy Lee as well, and said he did not think the goals and objectives are unreasonable. Commissioner Romero said that if the Commission is going to look at Department personnel giving input then it needs to be researched carefully as to how to get it done, but as it stands it does not really work because there is usually not a hundred percent participation from staff. Commissioner Romero stated that unfortunately the staff that usually responds are those that have an agenda.
President Walker stated that she would suggest researching this and talking with Director Hasenin because she wants it to be something that he is comfortable with. Commissioner Sattary said that this decision came from his background in private practice. Commissioner Sattary stated that they instituted a process of 180 degrees where everyone participated and gave their feedback, so there were positives for both cases. Commissioner Sattary said that he found his staff’s comments valuable. Commissioner Sattary stated that ultimately the forms are guidelines and it is impossible to put the items of importance for seven members in one form, since each Commissioner would have their own criteria in mind. Commissioner Sattary asked if the process for the staff evaluation could be started by talking with Director Hasenin and also researching how to implement it or find out if other city organizations have done this.
President Walker said that she would be happy to start the process. Commissioner Romero stated that the form should not become a form for griping, ranting and raving. President Walker said that the Commission needed to do an evaluation for Secretary Ann Aherne as well as Director Hasenin. Commissioner Romero stated that he would have to recuse himself from Secretary Aherne’s evaluation because his union represents her. President Walker said that the Commission also needs to agendize Secretary Aherne’s evaluation.
Vice-President Lee asked if it would be fair and appropriate to ask that Director Hasenin, just prior to the annual review, make a presentation as to the state of DBI. Vice-President Lee said that Director Hasenin could tell the Commission what the Department has done, what he has or has not accomplished, in addition to what he still wants to accomplish.
Director Hasenin stated that he put together the items for evaluation as a result of the things he thought he should be working on, and a lot of that came from his presentation. Director Hasenin said that because of the unique relationship of who he works for, that it might be helpful to have something in writing because all of the Commissioners may have different expectations. Director Hasenin stated that he wanted to make sure before he goes too far that he understands what the expectations are and work towards them. Director Hasenin said that since he is new on the job he hoped to have a six month evaluation and then a one year evaluation. Director Hasenin stated that another option as far as getting input outside of the Commission is to get input from the people he regulates, since those are the customers he approves the processes for. Director Hasenin said that he recommends getting input from stake holders, repeat customers, organizations and other groups. Director Hasenin stated that he is working on the things that the Commission feels are important to the Department.
President Walker said that she suggests that all of the Commissioners review the criteria they have discussed so far, and then put this item on the agenda for the next month to finish the conversation. President Walker stated that the six month evaluation would be in September and the one year evaluation would be in March. President Walker said that she would try to work with Secretary Aherne to make the evaluation make sense in the City’s format, and would try to find out how other departments may evaluate input other than that from the Commission. President Walker stated that if possible she would like all of the Commissioners to be present at the six month and one year evaluations.
|
|
|
CLOSED SESSION (ACTION ITEM)
Public Employee Appointment: Discussion and possible action on the Director of Building Inspection’s recommendation; three affected employees – Assistant Director and two Deputy Director positions.
- Public Comment on all matters pertaining to the Closed Session.
- Possible Action to convene a Closed Session.
- CLOSED SESSION: Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and the San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(b).
- Reconvene in Open Session to vote on whether to disclose any or all discussion held in Closed Session (Administrative Code Section 67.12
This item was continued until the next meeting.
|
|
|
Review and approval of the minutes of the May 7, 2007 meeting.
Commissioner Theriault said that there was a correction in the spelling of Webcore WEBCOR.
Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Theriault that the minutes be approved with the correction. The motion carried unanimously.
BIC RESOLUTION NO. 042-07
|
|
12.
|
Review and approval of the minutes of the May 21, 2007 meeting.
Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Murphy that the minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously.
BIC RESOLUTION NO. 043-07
|
|
13.
|
Review and approval of the minutes of the May 30, 2007 meeting.
Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Murphy that the minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously.
BIC RESOLUTION NO. 044-07
|
|
14.
|
Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.
a. Inquiries to Staff. At this time, Commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures, which are of interest to the Commission.
Commissioner Grubb said that he had a question about the communications the BIC received from ATI Legal Outreach and their request for an expedited permit process, and wanted to know if the Commission knew the status of this. Director Hasenin stated that this may have already been taken care of in the Department. Director Hasenin said that he would look at this and see if it qualifies or not. Secretary Aherne stated that the Director was sent a copy of the letter and would check with his Secretary to make sure it was taken care of.
Commissioner Grubb said that he was curious about the status of the letter the Commission got from the office of the late Mayor Alioto concerning cancellation of the site permit for 770 Powell Street. Commissioner Grubb stated that this letter was addressed to the Zoning Administrator, but was also directed to the Department.
President Walker said that this letter was regarding a matter of the site permit issue where the Director changed the process. Director Hasenin stated that he thinks this was the situation where DBI renewed the expired application and put a hold on it through the Planning Department. Director Hasenin said that he believed he received a letter from Larry Badiner stating that Planning has looked into the situation and are allowing the project to proceed, but said he he would confirm this.
Commissioner Grubb stated that the Department completed a partial review of some of the buildings in the City, through the Soft Story project and was wondering what the status was and if the project was going to be completed. Director Hasenin said that DBI is planning on completing the project. Director Hasenin stated that Ray Lui had a couple of student interns that started at the Department this week, who will continue the initial assessment of the rest of the City. Director Hasenin said that the point is to have a good idea of what is going on in the City and go back and do a detailed assessment to determine if DBI should send people letters or what type of action to take. Director Hasenin stated that he wants to put more emphasis within the Department to go out and do those programs, whether this is done by volunteers, student interns or DBI staff to get those done as quickly as possible. President Walker said that hopefully this would tie into the CAPSS Program with the BIC getting updates at every meeting until the process is completed.
Commissioner Romero said that he and his partner recently bought a home in San Francisco and what was surprising were the number of illegal units all over the City. Commissioner Romero stated that what irked him about some of the units is that people were renting places that should not be rented at all, such as in garages or basements. Commissioner Romero asked how people could make complaints within the Department, taking into consideration language barriers or the fact that people are hesitant to complain if they do not want to get kicked out of their house, or fear of being turned into the I.N.S. Commissioner Romero said that he was concerned about the ethnic break down of the Department and whether or not it is accessible to different communities in San Francisco.
President Walker stated that maybe this item could be put on the agenda for the next meeting. President Walker said that this issue involves the Community Education & Outreach Program (CEOP), because complaints come in through this program since the CEOP groups serve people who are nervous about complaining to the actual department. Director Hasenin stated that there should be a formal presentation that is timely for the Commissioners, especially those who are new to see how the Housing program works. Director Hasenin said that the Housing division has multiple programs for outreach and community input, and the Department uses volunteers, staff, and bilingual staff. President Walker stated that the BIC could do an update on the issue of illegal units, because it is one that is constantly coming up, but is a can of worms.
Commissioner Grubb said that when he previously headed the Housing Inspection Division this being a major issue over fifteen years ago and it is still a problem because people do not want to report their units since that basically means they are going to lose them. Commissioner Grubb stated that he thinks people are more concerned about losing the unit than getting reported to the I.N.S. as most of the illegal units can not be legalized because of code or zoning issues.
Vice-President Lee stated that Director Hasenin penned an opinion piece that was published by the Examiner last Friday, and it essentially repeats what he told the Commission at the last meeting. Vice-President Lee said that now the message is broadcasted beyond City Hall to the public and everybody that reads the Examiner. Vice-President Lee stated that yesterday there was an editorial in response to the opinion piece about the Department, and it was very positive. Vice-President Lee stated that DBI is moving forward in the right direction and commended the Director and staff for helping move this Department forward.
Director Hasenin thanked Vice-President Lee and stated that Bill Strawn has been a great asset to him. Director Hasenin said that he met with the editorial board for the San Francisco Chronicle and the Examiner, and would be meeting with the Business Journal this week. Director Hasenin stated that he and Mr. Strawn are trying to change the impression of what people think about the Department of Building Inspection.
b. Future Meetings/Agendas. At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Building Inspection Commission.
President Walker stated that the next meeting would be on July 18th, which is the third Wednesday of July. Secretary Aherne asked if all of the Commissioners would be there. Commissioner Murphy said that he would, but would not be present for the August meeting. President Walker said that she was going to try to schedule a Joint Meeting with the Planning Commission. Secretary Aherne stated that the Planning Commission is trying to set up a meeting when they have five Thursdays in a month. President Walker said that beginning next month the Litigation Committee will meet the same week as the Building Inspection Commission meeting. Secretary Aherne asked if President Walker and Commissioner Romero would both be present for the June 25th meeting since Commissioner Murphy would be absent. President Walker said that she and Commissioner Romero would be able to attend.
|
|
16.
|
Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC 045-07
The meeting was adjourned at 11:15 a.m.
|
|
|
Respectfully submitted,
___________________
Sonya Harris
Assistant Secretary
___________________
Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary
|
|
|
|
|
|
