Building Inspection Commission
Wednesday, July 16, 2003 City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 408 Adopted Wednesday, August 6, 2003 MINUTES The regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 3:05 p.m. by President Fillon. 1. Call to Order and Roll Call - Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified. COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Alfonso Fillon, President Denise D'Anne, Commissioner Bobbie Sue Hood, Vice-President Esther Marks, Commissioner Roy Guinnane, Commissioner Rodrigo Santos, Commissioner Matt Brown, Commissioner Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES: Frank Chiu, Director Amy Lee, Assistant Director Jim Hutchinson, Deputy Director William Wong, Deputy Director Sonya Harris, Secretary 2. President's Announcements. President Fillon had no announcements. 3. Director's Reports. [Director Frank Chiu] a. Status of 879 Rhode Island Street. Director Chiu said that this item was requested by a public member who came to the Commission meeting and stated that plans that he had reviewed for 879 Rhode Island Street were of a poor quality with no dimensions shown. Director Chiu said that he had asked Deputy Director Wong to look into this matter. Deputy Director Wong said that this matter came before the Commission on July 2, 2003 by Mr. John Carney who was present at today's meeting. Mr. Wong stated that there were three complaints; the first one was that the plans that were submitted did not contain window dimensions; the second complaint was that DBI had to send back to the engineer seventeen plan review comments and the third complaint was that Mr. Carney was concerned about DBI accepting incomplete or poor plans for this project. Mr. Wong said that he requested the original plans and he also had the superceded sets with him because they are kept until the permit is issued. Mr. Wong said that he would walk the Commission through the plans. Mr. Wong stated that in June 2001 two applications were filed, one to demolish the building and a new construction permit was applied for to erect a four-story two-unit residential building. Mr. Wong said that when the applicant applies for a site permit they submit just the architectural plans and once it is approved by City Planning, the addendum is submitted. Mr. Wong said that he had revision number three with him dated March 2003 and said that he also had a copy of the addendum plans dated April 24, 2003 so City Planning has reviewed and approved these plans already. Commissioner Guinnane asked how this plan, being two units, qualified for a site plan as he thought there was a certain threshold or a dollar amount of $4M before there was a site plan or an addendum. Mr. Wong said that essentially anyone could come in and apply for a site permit if they do not want to spend the cost initially to prepare complete plans. Mr. Wong said that people usually do this when they are doing an extension or particularly for new construction because they do not know if Planning is going to approve the project. Mr. Wong said that all of the window sizes are shown on these plans. Commissioner Santos and President Fillon looked at the plans. Mr. Wong showed the Commissioners the diamonds that referenced the windows on the plans. Mr. Wong said that the complainant said also said that the dimensions were not given on the elevations, but normally it is not dimensioned on two places as it is shown on the floor plans. Mr. Wong said that the other thing that Mr. Carney had concerns about was that there were no dimensions going to the exterior walls and pointed out that it was clearly shown on the plans where the window is in relationship to the property line as well as to the exterior walls. Mr. Wong stated that Carney was concerned that there was seventeen plan review comments and said that for a project of this size seventeen comments were not unusual. Mr. Wong said that in reviewing these plans he would disagree with the complainant's general statement that DBI reviews and accepts poor plans. Mr. Wong said that these plans were of acceptable quality, if not of superb quality because they were done on a computer, by a licensed person and more information was given on the plans than would normally be required for a site permit. Mr. Wong said that he thought that the complainant was talking about the small size plans, the 8½" by 11" that were sent out by City Planning, as they are very reduced very small and some of those dimensions might not be readable, but DBI does not review those or plan check those. Commissioner Santos said that he would have to concur with Mr. Wong on his findings on these plans and said that perhaps the complainant was looking at a different set of plans or the review set of plans. Mr. Wong said that maybe the complainant had no idea how to read the plans and did not understand how the dimensions were keyed in. Mr. Wong said that he thought this was a good opportunity because complaints come before the Commission and the Commissioners might get the impression that something has really gone wrong with DBI, just as with the Civil Grand Jury Report, or that there is the perception that DBI is accepting poor plans because it is heard from one or two people. Mr. Wong said that in this case he could say that his staff did an excellent job in accepting these plans and stated that he would disagree with the complainant. Vice-President Hood asked if when the Planning Department sends out its notices does it send the whole set, or what it possible that the notice went out without having the window schedule attached. Mr. Wong said that he thought that was possible, but it is his understanding that when the notice is sent out it is sent out on a small size sheet of paper and only the basic floor plans are provided. Mr. Wong said that DBI does not deal with that issue, as it is a Planning process. President Fillon said that window sizes are not required on the notices that are sent out. Commissioner Santos agreed. President Fillon said that having looked at the plans he would concur with Commissioner Santos that there is nothing out of the ordinary on those plans. Vice-President Hood asked if somebody notified the person who complained. Mr. Wong said that he was in the audience. Mr. John Carney said that his comments on these drawings were that there was no way of knowing how far the windows are up or down from the floor. Vice-President Hood said that typically the location of the windows is shown on the floor plan. Mr. Carney said that it was not dimensioned. Mr. Wong said that the only time the Department gets involved in a sill height situation is on an egress window off of a bedroom and other than that it is aesthetics. President Fillon said that this is only a site permit application and it would be on a full set of plans. Mr. Wong said that he thought Mr. Carney was concerned about Planning issues. Vice-President Hood said that she believed that those were Planning issues and said that Mr. Carney should speak with the Plan Checker doing the review and that person could probably answer all of his questions. Mr. Carney said that he saw a set of plans to see if a certain modification had been made and the set of plans that the Building Inspection Department has was certainly better dimensioned that the set of plans that he saw. Mr. Carney said that he would stand corrected as he must have seen the wrong set of plans and the staff person in Planning said that those were the only plans that they had. Mr. Carney said that he apologized to DBI, but said that he had a more fundamental problem because a lot of times the architects are in such a big hurry that they do not change the drawings to agree with the dimension that they put on them. Mr. Carney said that he found a case today where he took a ruler and it wasn't the same as the dimension, but that was in Planning so it wasn't DBI's responsibility. Mr. Carney stated that there was another case over on Grandville Terrace where a guy put in a dimension of eleven feet and that was to the top of the balcony when everybody thought that it was to the floor and it came back for a rework two or three times. Mr. Carney said that he stood corrected and stated that he was very happy that DBI was doing this, but if DBI had to work off of Planning's drawings there would be big trouble because none of the dimensions are on them. Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Carney what his function was in checking all of these plans for different jobsites. Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Carney was hired by different individuals to look at projects. Mr. Carney stated that it was just a problem that neighbors were looking at in Potrero Hill because the buildings are being really pushed to the envelope of the Planning Code. Mr. Carney said that the building on Rhode Island is supposed to be a height of 40 feet and it ended up being forty-three feet high with a deck on the top and a staircase to get up to the top of the step. Mr. Carney said that the Planning Department has now said that there can be no access to the roof and the roof cannot be used as open space. Mr. Carney said that a lot of the projects on Potrero Hill end up going for DRs (Discretionary Reviews) and DRs cost a lot of money. Mr. Carney said that once again he would like to apologize to the Department. Mr. Wong said he appreciated the speaker's clarification on this, but for the record he wanted to say that the official application that came in as of June 21, 2001 and the plans that the Commission looked at were the same set of plans that were submitted at that time. Commissioner Brown asked if the plans were public record. Mr. Wong said that was correct. Mr. O'Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that, not as a correction, but on an expansion of what the gentleman said about Planning and builders violating codes, the Planning Code is not in conformity as it comes to the Disabled Access to the roof with neither the Building Code nor the State Code. Mr. O'Donoghue said that years ago the Planning Code to give equal access for disabled people had to make the elevator shaft three to four feet higher because when someone is in a wheelchair that additional height was needed. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that the State, because of requests by the disabled community, changed the State Code to say that the access to the roof is going to be this or that and oddly enough with the so-called progressives that are down at the Planning Commission who say how green they are and how progressive they are, they are the ones who are stopping and opposing the Planning Code from being brought into conformity with the Building Code and the State Code. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the Planning Commission would lose hands down in court were they to go there so it not like anyone was violating laws. Mr. O'Donoghue said that he would disagree with Mr. Carney that if conformity was made to the rules, the innuendo being that the rules are being violated there would be less and less protests. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the records do not show that. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that the fact is that protest is a legitimate part of the San Francisco philosophy and is going to be hear whether we like it or not and no amount of conformity is going to change that. Mr. O'Donoghue said that if he were building a building five feet away from his neighbor and is going to impact their air or light even though it is allowed in the Code the neighbor is going to file a protest and that is legitimate. Mr. O'Donoghue said that this is negotiation and there is nothing wrong with it; it is the process that it takes to hear that complaint is what is remiss when the politics come in and there are subjective decisions then on either side. Mr. O'Donoghue said that there has to be rules. b. Status of bar coding system for DBI's permit tracking. Director Chiu said that item 3b is to give the Commission an update as to where the Department is today as to the bar coding system as there has been a lot of interest in this item. Director Chiu said that the original bar coding contract was awarded by in 2000/2001 and was part of the contract that GCSI, the contractor for COIT, was supposed to perform, but the contractor went bankrupt and as part of the bankruptcy that project did not move forward. Director Chiu said that the Commission's MIS Committee has resubmitted all of the MIS related project to COIT about six or seven weeks ago and that project was approved again. Director Chiu said that he is now, through the direction of the Committee, leaning toward doing this project under an RFP rather than using COIT people or their contractors. Director Chiu said that the RFP is a long process because first the Department has to write the RFP and send it out for bid and that would add an additional three or four months to the process. Director Chiu stated that he would be working with the Committee to work on the RFP in detail before anything is sent out for bid. Director Chiu said that he had directed the acting MIS Manager, Sue Metzger to start the development and hopefully in the next couple of weeks there will be a draft. Commissioner Guinnane asked who actually comes up with the RFP and asked if the Manager of MIS was actually out on a disability leave. Director Chiu said that he had appointed Sue Metzger the MIS Manager through a work order, as she is an employee of DTIS. Director Chiu stated that the person that Commissioner Guinnane asked about it was his understanding that as soon as the new Manager was appointed he filed for a long-term sick leave. Vice-President Hood asked why DBI rejected the people who would have been available at COIT and did they have people who were capable of doing this. Director Chiu said that for the last seven or eight years every project that DBI has requested has been done through COIT and it has been his experience that DBI has not had very good luck with those projects. Vice-President Hood said that she thought there was a requirement in the City that the Department had to do that. Director Chiu said he thought that when the Department says that it is going for the RFP process COIT would set up roadblocks as to why that shouldn't happen, but the Department was going to try anyway. Commissioner Guinnane said that based on all of the allegations that have surfaced with the DBI MIS he would have a real problem supporting COIT and said that he would wholeheartedly agree with going with the RFP process. Vice-President Hood said that she has always been opposed to COIT, but just wanted to know why the Department was abandoning it at this time whereas it was not done before. Director Chiu stated that it was based on four or five high profile projects that the Department has not been happy with and originally DBI thought that there were checks and balances because of paying the 1.9%. Director Chiu said that as recently as a few months ago COIT acknowledged that they were on top of every project and knew about the subcontractors, but with the recent investigations this was not the case. Vice-President Hood asked where Sue Metzger came from and asked if Director Chiu had called her references before she came to the Department. Director Chiu said that when the whole MIS mess came about he felt that the Department needed someone with expertise who had no ties to anyone in DBI so he went to DTIS and spoke to the Director of DTIS to get such a person. Director Chiu said that DTIS is the Department of Telecommunication Information Systems and are in charge of all Citywide MIS issues. Director Chiu said that COIT is another umbrella that takes care of all of the contracts; DTIS takes care of the infrastructure and the telecommunication's system. Director Chiu stated that DTIS has about 500 - 600 employees in the Department that take care of all of the City's MIS related needs. Director Chiu said that the DTIS Director referred him to Sue Metzger to help DBI and her role initially was to come in and give the Department an independent assessment as to what is working with MIS and what is not and what the Department should do. Director Chiu said that Ms. Metzger has been reporting to him and the Commission Committee. Director Chiu reported that Ms. Metzger has presented him with a draft with finding and recommendations; Ms. Metzger is on loan. Vice-President Hood asked if Director Chiu had check Ms. Metzger's references before she came on board. Director Chi said he did and stated that Ms. Metzger came highly recommended by the Director and Chief of Technology of Information from DTIS. Vice-President Hood said that she understood that the City recommended Ms. Metzger, but the problem that DBI had before was that the original resume by which the person was hired was fraudulent and asked if Director Chiu could ask Ms. Metzger for a resume that went beyond the time that she worked for the City. Director Chiu said that Ms. Metzger gave him a copy of all of her credentials along with a resume. Vice-President Hood asked if this information included where Ms. Metzger went to school and everything and asked if Director Chiu checked that. Director Chiu said that Ms. Metzger is on loan and technically speaking is not a DBI employee, but is an employee of DTIS. Vice-President Hood said that what she was hearing from Director Chiu was that he did not check her references and did not call any of the people on her resume. Director Chiu said that he had not yet called anybody, the reason being that he offered her the job in view of what happened with DBI's internal problems. Vice-President Hood said that it seemed to her that the Department was repeating the same mistakes as before. Director Chiu said that this is timely because the next item on the agenda would address this issue. Vice-President Hood asked if Ms. Metzger had done the draft for the RFP. Director Chiu stated that he had just asked Ms. Metzger to begin that process. Mr. Joe O'Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he hoped that the Grand Jury was not timing him because when someone speaks before the Commission like this in the open it is a negative in their viewpoint and it is only when it is done behind doors that it is a positive. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that he thought that the Director should have checked the qualifications of this temporary employee because Marcus Armstrong was hired in from a temporary list. Mr. O'Donoghue said that any reference from a City department head that this Commission is not familiar with should be met with the same level of skepticism as if Mr. Harrington himself from the Controller's Office recommended it. Mr. O'Donoghue said that this is suspect because who knows maybe DTIS is in bed with COIT or whatever and the Department doesn't know so therefore this Commission, if it is going to stop the criticisms for the mistakes of outsiders who pop people in on us and the Department does not do the proper quality control then the same errors that were made in the past are going to be repeated. Mr. O'Donoghue said that those references of that lady need to be checked out because the last thing that the Department needs to do, and she may be the most competent, qualified person in the world, is to repeat mistakes of the past and those references should be checked out tomorrow, immediately. Mr. O'Donoghue said that if the press calls up tomorrow and finds out from the minutes of this meeting that DBI failed to check qualifications once again there would be headlines once again. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that he did not need to down at these meetings to do quality control and said that this was not acceptable. Vice-President Hood said that DBI should look to see if this person has filed a Statement of Economic Interest, as this was another issue with Marcus where he did not want to file that. Vice-President Hood stated that the person coming in is going to have an incredible affect on how the Department is going forward with MIS they should definitely file a Statement of Economic Interest whether they are required to or not. Commissioner Guinnane said that at the last Commission meeting there was an item put on the calendar to be discussed and that was an Economic Statement for the Manager of the MIS. Commissioner Guinnane stated that Director Chiu told the Commission that DHR had approved it that day so it is now mandatory for the Manager of MIS whether it is outside or inside to fill out an Economic Statement just like everybody else. Director Chiu said that originally when this item was put on the agenda it was to address the bar coding system and was not intended to discuss employees. Director Chiu said that he did want to put it on record that DBI has a 1071 MIS Manager who is an employee who bumped in from the Fire Department. Director Chiu said that when he says "acting", Sue Metzger is not an employee yet. Vice-President Hood said that Director Chiu just said that Ms. Metzger is in charge of MIS and it doesn't make any difference whether she is on loan or whatever; what is important here is the quality control. Vice-President Hood said that it is about getting it right this time. Director Chiu said that he understood, but was trying to say that he had to put Ms. Metzger in charge because the Acting Manager immediately decided to call in on a long-term sick leave so he had to find somebody to put in charge for a few days while the Department was trying to resolve the issue of this new person from the Fire Department. Director Chiu stated that in response to the questions about references and all these other things this could be discussed during the next item. Commissioner Guinnane said that Director Chiu is talking about three individuals, one out on disability, one from the Fire Department and now another individual from DTIS and asked if the Department was paying three Manager's salaries. Director Chiu said that Mike Taylor from the Fire Department started on July 1st and the DBI is stuck with him because of the bumping rights trough Civil Service. Vice-President Hood said that the Department could just have said that this position was not needed right now. Director Chiu said that the Department tried to do that. Commissioner Guinnane said that DBI tried to delete the position and that was not possible. Commissioner Guinnane stated that the question he put to the Director was that there are three individuals and are they all getting Manager's pay. Director Chiu said no, Sukh was not getting paid as a Manager and his classification was changed. Commissioner Brown asked if this person was on disability. Director Chiu said that he had filed with a doctor's note through Personnel that he would not be able to return to work until August 8th. Commissioner Brown asked if this person was hired and then immediately filed for disability. Director Chiu said that he was personally having some difficulty with this person and that was when the employee filed for sick leave. Commissioner Guinnane said that the Director did not answer the question Commissioner Brown asked. Commissioner Guinnane stated that this person was an employee with DBI and when there was a problem with the existing Manager, Sukh was put in temporarily to act as a Manager and then when he discovered that he was not going to be the permanent Manager, he decided to go out on some kind of a disability or sick leave. Commissioner Brown asked if this was until August. Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not know what the date was. Commissioner Guinnane said that the Commission could not really discuss these personnel issues. President Fillon said that he would like the Commission to get regular reports on any RFPs through the Committee. Vice-President Hood said that she would like to see a draft of the RFP so the whole Commission could review it. Director Chiu said that was his intent. Vice-President Hood said that the RFP process was very complex. President Fillon stated that a timeline would be very helpful for the Department and the Commission to keep track of the progress of such things as the bar coding. 4. Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda. There was no public comment. 5. Discussion and possible action on DBI policies and guidelines to verify qualifications of future MIS hires. [John Marquez, Personnel Officer] Mr. John Marquez, Personnel Officer of DBI, said that to address the issue of future employment of MIS people he wanted to give the Commission a little bit of background as to how DBI hires its current staff, in addition to the MIS staff. Mr. Marquez stated that DBI either hires people directly from eligible lists, which involves people who applied at the Department of Human Resources (DHR), took an exam and got on an eligible list and are then referred to DBI for consideration. Mr. Marquez said that the Department would also hire people when there is no eligible list on a provisional basis where DBI handles the entire process of recruiting, accepting applications, determining and doing the background checks and verifying credentials. Mr. Marquez said that the Department also receives people from, what is called, an employment registry where people apply to Human Resources, get on a registry and then DBI would conduct an interview or a test to make sure that they have the right job knowledge. Mr. Marquez said that the MIS staff came from a registry. Mr. Marquez stated that the registry was originally created to handle clerical staff and then it was used to give DBI referrals for MIS staff. Mr. Marquez said that obviously in this case the credentials were not required or provided for Mr. Armstrong. Mr. Marquez said that he would like to just go ahead and handle this hiring the same way as the Department does whenever DBI handles an exam or does a provisional recruitment, so DBI would be in control of the entire process and do those checks. Commissioner Guinnane asked what happened with Marcus Armstrong and who was to blame for checking his qualifications, was it DBI or the list he was on, as there is some finger pointing as to who is responsible. Mr. Marquez said that he did not know if he wanted to assess blame, but stated that he would take responsibility knowing in retrospect that if Mr. Armstrong did falsify his credentials the Department could have caught it had DBI used the other process and not relied on DHR. Mr. Marquez said that what happens right now is that there is a check list and a person checks off that they qualify for this, this and this and DHR accepts that at face value. Mr. Marquez stated that the recruitment announcement did not specify whether or not there was a degree requirement and that was one of the things that Mr. Armstrong did, in fact, falsify. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that the problem here was the process and checking very fundamental things. Vice-President Hood stated that in the area of computer technology the path to expertise is not necessarily through the regular college system, although somebody like that would be wonderful. Vice-President Hood said that it was just verifying what Mr. Armstrong said was actually true. Vice-President Hood stated that she has never hired anyone in her office without checking what they said on the resume because it is a notorious problem in this country, that people do creative writing on their resumes. Vice-President Hood asked if typically for the rest of the Department if the Personnel Office actually gets transcripts from the places where people went to school. Mr. Marquez said that where DBI is in control of the entire process, Personnel will ask for transcripts, diplomas and actual verification letters from past employers. Vice-President Hood asked if Personnel actually calls past employers. Mr. Marquez said that this could be done and it would be narrowed down to perhaps the final five people that the Department might want to select. Mr. Marquez said that there could be an offer of employment conditional on verifying that information. Mr. Marquez said that it would slow down the process, but it would be worth it. Vice-President Hood said that it would be a lot faster than spending a couple of years with the wrong person and then it becomes very expensive as well. Vice-President Hood said that a degree should be something that would be considered in the RFP, as she understood that very often there has to be a degree or some other equivalent. Mr. Marquez stated that the announcement for MIS people is set up by DHR and said that Civil Service is now looking at this as a Citywide problem. President Fillon said that more important than a degree is experience in what a person is being hired to do and to verify that the candidates have the like experience. President Fillon said that a lot of times what people put down on their resumes are true, but it might not be relevant even though it might sound similar and that is why it needs to be followed up. President Fillon said that this is a Management position and the person needs the experience to lead a staff. Vice-President Hood asked Mr. Marquez to explain one more time why the MIS Manager had this different process than the rest of the Department. Mr. Marquez said that he could only surmise that this was what Human Resources set up because it was a faster process to get applications into the pool and into the departments. Mr. Marquez stated that he did not know of any other rationale. Mr. Marquez said that DHR went through a study several years ago to look at all of the MIS positions and reallocated a brand new set of requirements solely for the purpose of recruiting MIS people because they were going to private industry due to the dot.com boom. Mr. Marquez said that the City was losing people to higher salaries in the private sector. Commissioner Brown asked about the possibility of the Department to take this on fully. Mr. Marquez said that DBI's Personnel Department does this on other classifications. Commissioner Brown asked if DBI would have to rest control from DHR. Mr. Marquez said that on certain occasions DBI will have a delegated agreement with DHR, where DBI is in charge of the entire exam process and the Department could request this for MIS, but it might not be granted. Commissioner Brown asked if the controversy with Mr. Armstrong would help or hinder DBI in that whole process. Mr. Marquez said that he thought that since he was being asked to go to the Civil Service Commission, it is an acknowledgement that this is a Citywide problem. Mr. Marquez said that DHR has lost staff that has been laid off so they might be happy to get help from the departments. Commissioner Marks said that she thought that the reason DHR did the exams was because outside departments did not have the expertise to do so. Mr. Marquez stated that DHR would require DBI Personnel staff to go through training to be certified as exam capable. Mr. Marquez said that one of his first jobs was as an examiner and said that his Senior Analyst was an Exam Analyst at Human Resources. Mr. Marquez stated that in his first year with DBI he conducted three exams, Building Inspector, Plumbing Inspector and Electrical Inspector because half of DBI staff was temporaries and in order to get them permanent status the exams had to be done. Mr. Marquez said that Personnel would do a full job analysis with input from the subject matter experts, so whoever is an expert in that field would be giving DBI the input. Mr. Marquez said that DBI would go to DTIS for input or to other jurisdictions for their input. President Fillon asked if MIS people actually went through a testing process because with most positions people have to take an exam to show competency in a particular area. Mr. Marquez said that DBI conducted an in-house examination for MIS. Mr. Marquez said that it was developed with input from two Managers from DTIS who actually constructed the questions, gave rating criteria, conducted the interviews, and rated the candidates. Vice-President Hood asked if that was for all Personnel regardless of their classification in MIS, in other words, for the lowest person in management as well as up to the Manager. Mr. Marquez said that it was for everybody. Mr. Marquez stated that some MIS staff has been with DBI since before DBI was a department and came from Public Works. Vice-President Hood said that in talking with people, such as clerical people there are great differences, but there are certain basic skills that people have to have. Vice-President Hood said that this is all that a test could measure and a test could not measure the ability to be a good Manager and the ability to do strategic sort of things. Mr. Marquez said that he believed that generic questions were asked about management skills, planning and so forth, but the continuation is intended to be the probationary period in terms of the employee's actual performance. Commissioner D'Anne asked if a person comes off the list is the Department restricted from inquiring about their qualifications. Mr. Marquez said that the Department could check the qualifications. Commissioner D'Anne said it would be the same if they were bumped from another Department. Mr. Marquez said that if someone is laid off from another department, DBI does not have any control over that because the person is there by Civil Service rules and rights; if there is an open position they will be referred to a vacancy or they could displace a less senior employee. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the position had to be the same or similar. Mr. Marquez said that it would have to be exactly the same class that they got laid off from. Mr. Marquez stated that in some instances there is something called a near list appointment where they can designate a closely related classification. Commissioner Brown asked if the Commissioners wanted to take possible action to recommend that this be dealt with in-house. Commissioner Brown said that it seemed like a good idea to him given the follies of the last hire. Vice-President Hood asked if there were ever any cases where a Manager was hired as Consultant to come in and direct DBI staff. Mr. Marquez said that this is what is happening with MIS right now, and it has been done in other departments. Vice-President Hood asked if this could be done in this situation. Mr. Marquez stated that the Department could actually do a limited term transfer where somebody would be appointed to DBI for a short transfer period and then go back to their own department. Vice-President Hood said that this would be somebody else in the City. Mr. Marquez said that was correct. Mr. Marquez said that there could be a referral from another department where they have the experts. Vice-President Hood stated that she was talking about going to an outside private consultant to come in and manage the staff. Mr. Marquez said that in that situation, he would anticipate resistance from the unions where the union would say that there were managers in other areas within the City that could be hired, so if DBI went for a contract it would have to go before the Civil Service Commission. Mr. Marquez stated that there would then be protests from Local 21. Mr. Joe O'Donoghue of Residential Builders said that the proposition that created the Bureau of Building Inspection clearly delineated and gave this Department the power totally to do all hiring within the Department because there were jobs that were DBI oriented. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the separation, in terms of setting examinations, which the Civil Service said they would retain as the power, is in the gray area. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the power for DBI to hire the MIS employees comes strictly from this Department and it was done in that proposition. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that DBI conceded and gave that power away, which the Department did, and now DBI is feeling the impact of it. Mr. O'Donoghue said that this was an in-house managerial problem that the Department should never have given up. Mr. O'Donoghue said that in addition to that, he would go further by saying it was the same with DBI's MIS contracts, in looking at the spirit of Proposition J, the Department should not be paying the Controller's Office the 1.9% and that should be questioned. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the Department has taken a clerical list, a clerical function that was done originally from the outside and took some clerical people to do computerization and then suddenly that magnified that they were hiring all the people into the MIS. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the Director needs to be more aggressive and said his criticism of the Director is that he has been too conciliatory. Mr. O'Donoghue said that conciliation does not work in government work. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that Richard Adams would have kicked the door down before he gave that power up and Mr. O'Donoghue said that he would go further that while the present system is working in terms of giving Civil Service, because the more work given, the more high employees that have to be justified, and the builders have to pay for this because they are being back charged for it anyhow. Mr. O'Donoghue said that in terms of examination they are contentious in this Department when it is recommended that DBI is going to hire an achiever, promote a chief and it is written skills that are important. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the employees know the Code, so what is the sense of giving an examination because it is the written skills that are important because there was a bad experience one time where a man was promoted that did not have any written ability. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that the Department requested in one examination recently that there be an hour-and-a-half of written and one-half hour of oral and up to the end date the Civil Service changed it and then turned around and made it one-half hour for written and forty-five minutes for oral. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the Department did nothing about this and that is not the way it should be. Commissioner Brown said that given what he heard today he would recommend that Mr. Marquez develop some sort of a strategy, if not in whole, at least in large part, the hiring process for MIS Managers so that the Department would be given the opportunity to crosscheck references to avoid what Commissioner Hood said was creative writing on resumes. Commissioner Brown said that if DHR was not going to do this, then DBI had to do it to protect the Department so that DBI does not get employees who lack the skills to be in those positions. President Fillon said that the Department needs to take as much control as it possibly can over who the staff is going to be and that should be a standing business practice. Commissioner Marks asked what were the other positions within the Department that DBI has the responsibility for the exam and hiring. Mr. Marquez said that if it is exclusive to Building Inspection then DBI has good control over it, but things like clerical positions are on a Citywide basis. Commissioner Guinnane said that the last speaker talked about Proposition G and said that DBI broke away from DPW that under Prop G DBI had the authority to oversee its own employees. Commissioner Guinnane asked how that was lost. Mr. Marquez said that DBI would have the ability to have the input in terms of whether Human Resources is doing the examination or not since the Department is the best authority in terms of what a Chief, a Senior or a Building Inspector should be and DBI would have input directly into that examination process. Mr. Marquez said that the Department also had the appointing authority in terms of the Department being able to select the best-qualified person, but the administration of the exam would still be done by Human Resources unless DBI fully takes that over, which is a possibility. Vice-President Hood stated that the Commission was recommending that the Department fully take this over. Mr. Marquez stated that the examination authority and Personnel matters are all under the Department of Human Resources under Section 8 of the Charter and they still have that control for oversight as well. Mr. Marquez said that DHR would look at DBI to make sure that DBI was maintaining the Civil Service rules and that it was being done properly. Mr. Marquez said that he did not know if he would agree fully with that since he is not an attorney and would have to get some kind of an opinion from a City Attorney in terms of how much DBI could take over. Commissioner Guinnane said that to assume that DBI could take it all over and asked how that would impact the Personnel division, Mr. Marquez and his employees. Mr. Marquez said that it would mean a lot more work because the workload would increase. Mr. Marquez said that there are times when departments would take on a centralized exam and would then be given a workload for instance to say, do a truck driver examination. Mr. Marquez said that since DBI doesn't have any truck drivers he would be very leery about taking on something like that. Mr. Marquez said that there are three professionals in his department, himself, a Senior Analyst and an Analyst, and DHR would probably want the Department to do a full exam load, which would be about eighty exams per year. Mr. Marquez said that he would have to negotiate because he would not want to impact his other operations because Personnel also handles all labor relations, payroll and other things. Commissioner Guinnane asked how many more people Personnel would need if they took over this task. Mr. Marquez said that he would first like to see how he would do with his current staff rather than to increase staff and then if there were a big workload he would probably request one or two more people. Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to move forward to try to regain as much of this back from DHR and have it all in-house for DBI only to include all the employees top to bottom. Vice-President Hood said she thought that would be a great idea, but would like it to be at least these key people and secondly, if that is not possible that there be screening exams at DHR, but then another exam at DBI that would more closely exam to the actual task rather than having it be so broad. Mr. Marquez stated that DBI does that, as there is a second exam that is given in-house which is much more specific to the Department's requirements. Vice-President Hood said that if DHR for some reason has to do the initial screening, then DBI should certainly be able to refer promising candidates to them and also do additional screening very specifically related to the job. President Fillon said that he thought that it would be a good idea for Mr. Marquez to come back, not at the next meeting, but at the meeting after that to tell the Commission how things are going. 6. Discussion and possible action to approve DBI's record retention policy and schedule. [Director Chiu] Director Chiu said that item #6 is an action item that is needed by this Commission to review and approve the record retention acts which have been implemented for a while, but must be reviewed every three or four years as requested by the City. Director Chiu said there was a package that was prepared by Assistant Director Amy Lee before she went on to maternity leave; Ms. Lee had worked with the City Attorney's Office and the City Administrator's Office to review this item to make sure that everything was sound. Director Chiu said that the Department would like the Commission to review and approve this issue so that the Department could use it as a policy. Director Chiu stated that this is not something new, but is just and updated version. Director Chiu said that he would recommend that the Commission approve this document. Vice-President Hood asked if there had been any problems with the current retention system. Director Chiu said no. Vice-President Hood said that this was just something that was required by the City and asked what would be the changes in this document that would be a change from what was being done right now. Director Chiu said that there are no substantive changes, but there might be some new documents listed that the Department did not have in the past. Vice-President Hood made a motion, seconded by Commissioner D'Anne, that the Commission approve the proposed revision regarding the Record Retention Policy and Schedule. The motion carried unanimously. Commissioner D'Anne said that while the Commission was on the subject of retention she was discussing with the Secretary about audio retention records that are now done on the little tapes. Commissioner D'Anne said that these keep piling up and said that the Secretary informed her that they have to be kept forever so there should be a better way to store them such as on a CD. Vice-President Hood said that this was a great idea and would be more permanent. Vice-President Hood said that she would add to her motion that the Building Inspection Commission Secretary look into ways of transferring the tape copies into a more permanent, perhaps CD format. The amended motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. BIC 034-03 7. Review of Communication Items. At this time, the Commission may discuss or take possible action to respond to communication items received since the last meeting. a. Letter dated July 3, 2003 from Randy Shaw of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic to the Building Inspection Commission regarding the Grand Jury Hearing. b. Memorandum dated June 30, 2003 from Director Frank Chiu to DBI Division Managers regarding Special Requirements for Permit Applications for Work in Earthquake-Induced Landslide Hazard Areas. c. Copies of thank you letters received from the public commending DBI employees and Director Chiu's response letters to the public. There was no discussion on this item. 8. Status of BIC Grand Jury Response Committee's meeting, discussion and possible action by the BIC. [President Fillon, Vice-President Hood an Commissioner Brown] Commissioner Brown said that the Committee was in the middle of the response team action. President Fillon said that the Committee met and had a good turnout and the Committee is continuing with the process. Mr. Joe O'Donoghue said that he attended the Committee meeting and said that it was interesting to hear Mr. McNulty who appears on behalf of the sub-committee of the Grand Jurors who came in and did this whole audit. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that the primary person Ms. Brady again failed to appear. Mr. O'Donoghue said that Ms. Brady was the person that was the attack dog of this Grand Jury set up that came in to take on this Department and it was obvious from Mr. McNulty's testimony that he was not that person, according to those people who were interviewed. Mr. O'Donoghue said that it was obvious that Mr. McNulty was switching the story from what he testified here that two people corroborated every factual conclusion that the Grand Jury made without giving the facts. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that this then became like the miracle of the loaves and the fishes, where up to thirty-two people were when cross examined and questioned, then it was down to several and the several diminished down to that, it was the opinion of others plus who they talked to on the outside. Mr. O'Donoghue said that Randy Shaw pointed out to this Commission that this is a report that, clearly from the facts coming in right now, is based on perception. Mr. O'Donoghue said that it is perception as written by the Chronicle or the old Examiner or whatever, trial by press of a Department that will never get the credit from Examiner or Chronicle reporters because the creation of this system went against the downtown interests. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that it is interesting to note that the AIA have now come on board against some of the downtown groups because they see that this Department is working, but there is still a group out there, a cadre, that will do everything to diminish the stature of this Department. Mr. O'Donoghue said that he thought this was a great opportunity, when the Department does respond; it will be able to respond factually to the facts as Mr. McNulty gave them. Mr. O'Donoghue said that Mr. McNulty was honest in the facts, as they were written saying what he could and what his perception was. Mr. O'Donoghue said that these need to be responded to and the facts that can't be responded to were listed in a letter that Director Chiu sent, which was a request to the Grand Jury to give that evidence to back up the facts. Mr. O'Donoghue said that Vice-President Hood brought up at a previous meeting that the confidentiality and privileged information, non-disclosure only pertains to the sources, but does not pertain to the people who have been bombed in the press like him. Mr. O'Donoghue said that Judge Hitchins should be forthcoming with that information. Mr. O'Donoghue said that he thought that the final thing would be that the Commission could, where it knows what the Grand Jury was addressing even though they haven't the proof, because they will not give that proof, because there is no proof, is where this report should be annihilated and take it out for what it is. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that he intends to take this all the way to the State Legislator and show that this system is a disgrace and has been highjacked for political purposes and they took on the wrong group. Mr. O'Donoghue said forget the fact that he has spent all his life fighting against windmills and he has won and this is another fight that he thought would be beneficial and this Commission can be the leaders because everyone is dissatisfied with this group. Mr. O'Donoghue thanked the Commission. Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that it is no secret that he is outraged by the Civil Grand Jury's report and said that he intended to take every opportunity possible to put on the record his thoughts and what he thinks the employees feel towards this report. Mr. Hutchinson said that at the meeting the other day it became apparent that the gentleman there from the Grand Jury, Mr. McNulty, indicated that there were thirty-five people, plus or minus, interviewed out of a Department staff of two-hundred eighty. Mr. Hutchinson stated that one of the employees interviewed made their identity known by disclosing part of his own personal file. Mr. Hutchinson said that he pointed out to Mr. McNulty that this particular individual is the only employee that he has known where the City Attorney's Office went to court and sought a restraining order against one of DBI's employees for interfering during a trial by threatening a witness. Mr. Hutchinson said that he has been with the Department for eighteen years and this never happened before, as he had never seen the City Attorney go to court against one of DBI's Inspectors who is on trial. Mr. Hutchinson said that this is ridiculous and this is one of the Grand Jury's sources. Mr. Hutchinson stated that another source is quite obviously someone who is a developer, someone who is working as a Building Inspector, and developing multi-million dollar projects and somehow the City Attorney thought that was okay. Mr. Hutchinson said that, as he told Mr. McNulty, he could not have a refrigerator delivered to his home or have his day interrupted by having to go and pick up his kid if the child is sick, as his day would be turned upside down. Mr. Hutchinson stated that he did not know how anyone could work in the Department of Building Inspection in a position, full time, and have the abilities to develop multi-million dollar projects as a sideline. Mr. Hutchinson said that he did not know what architect, engineer or contractor would want to hire one of DBI's people unless there was something in it for them, quite frankly, and these are two of the Grand Jury's sources. Mr. Hutchinson said that he thought this was important to know because these two people and other like them have slandered the entire Department of hardworking, honest people and it is regrettable because their actions show them for what they are. Mr. Hutchinson stated that these people have been written about extensively, they are problematic employees and their files are huge. Mr. Hutchinson stated that he is sick of those employees coloring hardworking employees by their actions. Mr. Hutchinson thanked the Commission. President Fillon said that he wanted to thank the staff members that attended the Grand Jury Committee meeting because their help is invaluable in putting together a response. Vice-President Hood said that the Department was fortunate to have an Attorney attend on a non-hired basis, Ken Harrington. Vice-President Hood stated that one of the best remarks made at the meeting in response to Mr. McNulty's description of the methodology was that it was "hearsay on top of hearsay". Vice-President Hood said, in addition, when she asked about the methodology of the questioning these were totally unstructured interviews and people who collect information that is going to be substantiated and is going to be the basis for claims or findings, need to go through a whole process of sort of training themselves not to suggest through their body language what they want to hear. Vice-President Hood said that to do interviews they really need to be structured, in other words, to ask the same questions of everybody and typically what the Grand Jurors did was to just go around and ask those interviewed what their thoughts were on DBI. Vice-President Hood said that this might be used to help them structure the questionnaire to see what things were coming up, but then if they wanted to have a good sample then everybody should be asked the same questions. Vice-President Hood stated that it became clear that although Mr. McNulty claimed that there were many people involved in this, no one knows what kind of consistency there was between the interviewers. Vice-President Hood said that as the Committee pressed Mr. McNulty further on how the interviewing was done, it became clear that there was no where near the number of people involved in such things as people getting special treatment. Vice-President Hood said that she thought as the Committee goes forward with this, the BIC will be able to come up with some very factual responses that don't make the Commission and the Department look defensive, but make it look like we really need to have the answers to these questions in order to do anything about these problems if they do exist. President Fillon said that his impression was that many of the questions were somewhat leading. Vice-President Hood said that in a regular trial an Attorney is not permitted to ask a witness a leading question. Commissioner Brown said that an Attorney could ask those kinds of questions in a cross-examination. Commissioner Guinnane said that in talking about the Grand Jury obviously there is a hidden agenda there because of the people that they actually talked to or interviewed in the Department. Commissioner Guinnane stated that he did not know if any of the Commissioners were interviewed, but he was never interviewed and said that he did not hear of any builders who were interviewed. Commissioner Guinnane said that it looked like it was only disgruntled employees who were interviewed and said that in looking at some of the records of those individuals, he would not want to be going on the testimony that they put forward. Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not know what it takes to be a Grand Juror, but said that he would like to know the resumes of the individuals or the qualifications that they have to pass judgment on the Department. President Fillon said that one thing that came up in asking how people got on this Grand Jury is that there is a pool of jurors, however they are selected, that get to choose what they are going to go after out of one-hundred items. President Fillon said that the jurors could choose from this list of one hundred the things that they want to investigate. Vice-President Hood stated that the Grand Jury only went after ten of those things. President Fillon said that this leads him to believe that the people who are most interested in DBI and maybe already have an agenda are going to gravitate to DBI and that jury. President Fillon said that it seemed to him that there is a problem with the system period. Vice-President Hood stated that it was pre-biased. President Fillon said that it would attract people that are already biased to be investigating that particular item. President Fillon said that the Committee would address these items and encouraged the Commissioners to submit any other issues. Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to see the actual resumes of Grand Jurors to see if they are actually qualified to pass judgment. Vice-President Hood said that she did not think that the Grand Jury would tell the Department anything at all. President Fillon said that the Department could ask for the information. 9. Review 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. 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. There was no discussion on this item. 10. Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda. There was no public comment. 11. Adjournment. Commissioner Guinnane made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Hood, that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously. RESOLUTION NO. BIC 035-03 The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m. _______________________ Ann Marie Aherne Commission Secretary SUMMARY OF REQUESTS BY COMMISSIONERS DBI Personnel Officer John Marquez to come up with a strategy for DBI to develop its own policy for hiring MIS personnel, or all DBI personnel. - President Fillon, Vice-President Hood, Commissioner Brown Pages 11 - 12 Commissioner Guinnane requested resumes from the Grand Jurors to see what qualifies them to examine DBI. Page 15 Secretary to look into a way to copy meeting audiotapes onto a more secure system. - Commissioner D'Anne Pages 12 - 13