2.

President’s Announcements

3.

a. Update on progress of 1650 move.

Acting Director Lee stated that for the past year and a half the Department has been in negotiations and worked to move the Planning Department out of 1660 Mission Street, in order to get additional space for DBI staff.  Ms. Lee said that the move is taking a longer time than anticipated, and Planning is supposed to move in March.  Ms. Lee stated that right now there is construction and office tenant improvements going on, and said she hoped the Commission would think of her in 2008 when all of this comes to fruition. Ms. Lee stated that DBI has been working with the Bureau of Architecture and expects a growth of 48% in office space.  Ms. Lee said that the Architectural Department is severely understaffed right now, and are trying to staff up to assist DBI with this move.   Ms. Lee stated that DBI is probably at the lowest end of the spectrum right now in comparing it with other jurisdictions as far as office space.  Ms. Lee mentioned that there would be increased office space for staff that would increase pre-application ability, but said that the big portion of this move is to revamp the Department’s customer intake area.  Ms. Lee stated that DBI hopes to start construction in September 2007, and ultimately get staff moved in by January 2008. Ms. Lee said that the project would tentatively cost $30M.

Commissioner Murphy asked Ms. Lee how much it has cost DBI so far to move Planning out. Ms. Lee replied that the cost was $3M to move the Planning Department out of 1660 Mission Street.  Ms. Lee stated that the Department has been working on this move for the past year and a half and said that there were some communication problems as it was thought that DBI would be able to vacate1650 completely and that the current space was sufficient but this was the wrong assumption. Ms. Lee said that DBI would continue to occupy probably the first floor of 1650 Mission along with having some staff on the third floor. Ms. Lee said that there are problems with DBI’s ventilation system, so when the Department does the construction the walls will be open and the mechanical systems will be checked as well.  Ms. Lee stated the Department would gain approximately 40,000 square feet after the Planning Department moves.

Ms. Lee said that DBI has been working with Planning and other Departments regarding this move and has a staff representative from each Division at DBI involved to give staff input.

President Walker said the Building Inspection Commission and the Planning Commission would be planning a public meeting together in order to get customers to give feedback for the public’s needs and encouraged the public to keep an eye out for that in the months ahead.

4.

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

Mr. Francisco D’Costa stated that in 1994 the City of San Francisco decided a better mechanism was needed to review the safety and the condition of its buildings.  Mr. D’Costa said that he has been paying attention to several of the Building Inspection Commission’s meetings, and as the Commissioners deliberate he thinks the time has come to fine tune a lot of policies, as well as discuss what is going on in the Department.  Mr. D’Costa stated that soon there would be thousands of units in the South East sector of the City, which would come under the jurisdiction of the San Francisco Redevelopment Agency.  Mr. D’Costa mentioned that it was agreed at a previous Commission meeting to hire more Inspectors, and said that more are needed because the Department can not allow the Redevelopment Agency and developers to go ahead and do as they please.  Mr. D’Costa said that he was referring to the redevelopment agreement linked to the Hunter’s Point project.  Mr. D’Costa stated that the Department should pay attention to solar energy, because there are companies that are having difficulties with processing solar permits in San Francisco.  Mr. D’Costa said that one company that wanted to benefit from using solar cells left the City to go to San Jose because of the permitting process.

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz discussed the parallel plan check process at DBI.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that if a customer has more than three stations to go to, the plans get disseminated to different departments for review.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated this decreases the amount of time to get a permit.  Mr. Karnilowitz commended Acting Director Amy Lee for holding a public meeting regarding parallel plan check, and said that the meeting was very well attended.

Mr. Tony Fu made various statements referring to Acting Director Lee, Leo McFadden, Jim Hutchinson, Rodrigo Santos, Frank Chiu, and Lou Aurea stating that these individuals had received preferential treatment because of their positions with DBI.  Mr. Fu said that he had been treated unfairly in his dealings with DBI.

Acting Deputy Director Carla Johnson asked if the City Attorney, John Malamut, could give the Commission guidance regarding issues raised in public comment that are currently being investigated through the City Attorney’s Office.  Ms. Johnson said that it does not seem fair for this to come up in a public forum without everyone who is mentioned having the opportunity to answer each allegation, because there are answers for each one.

Ms. Amy Lee said that she was speaking as a private citizen.  Ms. Lee stated that she wanted to make the record clear that she did not get away with anything, her remodel was not illegal, and she did not ignore any requirements.  Ms. Lee said that she went through two Board of Permit Appeals’ hearings and won them both.  Ms. Lee explained that when 3-R Reports are reprinted now they automatically contain her signature.

Ms. Gloria Argueta said that she was glad she stayed for the regular meeting to see that there was a forum to convey her sentiments about the Building Inspection Department.  Ms. Argueta stated that certain staff at DBI should attend a class in ethics.  Ms. Argueta said that it should not become a personal confrontation between the staff and the citizens that have violations. Ms. Argueta stated that DBI staff should set aside their personal sentiments and act ethically at all times, and said that she did not see that happening in the Department of Building Inspection.

5.

Update on Joint Meeting with Planning Commission.[President Debra Walker]

President Walker said that there was a Joint Meeting with the Building Inspection Commission and the Planning Commission, and thanked staff for a wonderful presentation.  President Walker stated that various issues were discussed such as:  The process of getting applications and working better with the Planning Department to pre-assess the appropriateness of projects, 311 notices and demolition notices, and joint efforts toward updating both departments’ computer systems.  President Walker stated that there was a presentation on seismic issues from Ray Lui, and from Fire Marshall Schulteis that addressed the concerns of both departments working with the Fire Department early on in the processes. President Walker said that she hoped this would result in all of the departments working together and said that there was going to be a follow-up Joint Meeting in six months.

Vice-President Lee said that he thought the meeting was very worth while, and said that he would like to do it again.  Vice-President Lee stated that it is important for the Planning Commissioners to ask questions that are important to the Department of Building Inspection for example the structural engineering questions because if the projects are organized properly in the beginning it would make life easier for DBI Inspectors, as well as for developers and builders.  Vice-President Lee explained that not doing so could result in enforcement problems for DBI.  Acting Director Lee said that a lot of times with Planning expectations are set differently than Building would like them set, so if there is early dialogue with each other both departments could set the public’s expectation.  Ms. Lee stated that if the Planning Department decides that every building can be a thousand feet high, then the Building Department has to figure out how to build it.  Ms. Lee said that there needs to be better communication and better understanding of timeframes on both ends.

President Walker said that several large projects have come before the Building Inspection Commission, which were approved by the Planning Department but could not be processed by DBI because the Fire Plan Checker said there was not enough room on the road for fire equipment to come in case of an emergency.  President Walker stated this is going to be a perceived delay on DBI’s part.  Acting Director Lee said that this there are issues even with smaller projects and said that she and Carla Johnson are working with Larry Badiner in Planning to resolve some of these issues.  Ms. Lee stated that when the first floor is re-designed DBI & Planning staff would be able to sit at the same counter  to figure out which projects do not need to go to Planning or which ones should go and approve it right there, rather than have the customer shop it around.

Commissioner Theriault said that at various points since he joined the Commission, he noticed that Planning occasionally gives the Building Inspection Commission catch 22 situations where some practice or regulation at Planning leads to a conflict with the Building Inspection process.  Commissioner Theriault stated that before the next meeting the Commissioners might actually agendize this item and list the different catch 22 issues and discuss how they could be addressed or have them mesh more closely with the Building Inspection process.

Commissioner Grubb stated that both Commissions teed up some really good issues at the meeting, and said he hoped that the Commission could put these in stone and be able to track them because it is critical to having future success.  Commissioner Grubb said that he would like for the Commission to come back and revisit these issues one at a time so that there could be some forward progress.  Commissioner Grubb stated that he hoped the Commission would continue to keep this on the agenda, as well as the other items that were brought up at the Joint Meeting.

President Walker said that she believed Planning had appointed someone to follow up on some of these issues.  President Walker stated that there is interest from staff on both sides to work out these issues as there are nine or ten issues that are consistently coming up to haunt the Departments, the public, and the project sponsors.  President Walker said there is a commitment to meet again in six months and that there is staff assigned to give everyone an update of what the recommendations are.

Commissioner Murphy stated that he thought it was a very productive meeting and said it is important to know that there is a line of communication open that is carried on in a positive fashion.  Commissioner Murphy said that it might be a good idea if there was a sub-committee of the Building Inspection Commission made up of perhaps an Architect, an Engineer, and possibly a Builder to keep the communication open and a dialogue going.  President Walker stated that the Commission could form a committee to work on this.  Acting Director Lee added that the Commission could form an interagency committee, with the Fire Department.  President Walker stated that the Commission may want to consider the people working on the computer integration system as part of the process.

Commissioner Hirsch said that an important issue that was brought up was the necessity of including the Fire Department early on involving Building Permit applications and Planning applications.  Commissioner Hirsch stated that another issue that was brought to the Planning Commission’s attention was the problem of the “catch 22” that occurs so often where a person can not demolish a building without submitting a site permit, but they can not get a site permit without proof that the building is truly unsafe.  Commissioner Hirsch said that it is necessary to have a better way to define the rules on items that trigger a requirement to have a project go back to Planning when things are discovered during the course of construction.  Commissioner Murphy stated that the way it is done now nothing gets done, so that needs to be addressed.

President Walker stated that there was an interest in restarting the Demolition Committee.  President Walker said that DBI was involved in a process around demolition in the past and said that perhaps staff could “dust up” the status and present it to the Commission to see what has been discussed, and also to determine how the process could be moved forward.

President Walker stated that the Commission should decide whether a Demolition Committee is different than a joint department meeting.  Commissioner Murphy said that there did not need to be a computer person involved with the demolition process, because it is not about computers, it is about demolition. President Walker stated that it is about the process between the two departments.

Vice-President Lee said that another issue that should be discussed with the Planning Department is the simplification of public notices.  Vice-President Lee stated that perhaps Planning could make the notices more uniform, because right now there are different notices and the radius or amount of notification is different for different tasks.  Vice-President Lee said that if possible, the notices should be simplified so it is equal across the board.  Vice-President Lee stated that when the public is notified of items on the agenda and a decision is made by the Commission there should be some way of notifying people of what the decision was.  Vice-President Lee asked if there was a hearing in front of the Planning Commission and a decision was made if that decision gets communicated to the public.  Secretary Aherne said that when an appeal is heard before the Building Inspection Commission, anybody interested that has asked for information on the item is sent a letter which shows what the Commission’s decision was.  President Walker stated that this is more about the 311 notices.  Secretary Aherne said that when there was an appeal before the Building Inspection Commission that she notifies the neighbors that want to be notified.

President Walker called for public comment.

Mr. Francisco D’Costa said that he listened to the Joint Meeting at home said he was going to dwell on the seismic issues.  Mr. D’Costa stated that the Department and the Commission should have a direct link to the United States Geological Survey Agency, because there are very detailed maps on that site that everyone needs to pay attention to.  Mr. D’Costa said that there are thousands of homes in the avenues for example, whose foundations are not sound because the homes are built on sand dunes.  Mr. D’Costa stated that if there is a big earthquake over 8.0 + these buildings will topple.  Mr. D’Costa said that some other issues that the Joint Planning and Building Inspection Committee should address are:  Cumulative pollution and recycling from high-rises, the daytime population in San Francisco is 1.5 million and the night-time population is 790,000, and include the infrastructure and mechanisms to address emergency services. Mr. D’Costa said at a previous Commission meeting it was mentioned that some of the plans for emergency services were stored in a building that was not seismically safe.

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he applauds the Joint Planning & Building Inspection Commission Meeting, and said he was present for a couple of hours and it was good to see everybody getting together.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that one item that was discussed at the meeting was the Permit Tracking System and said that he has actually been having problems with looking up addresses.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that when he enters certain addresses into the system that he gets an error message with a red line that says “street number and field have invalid characters”.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that there are permits open on the addresses that he has tried to look up, but the only way he was able to access them was by entering his name. Mr. Karnilowitz said that he would like the Commission to look into working on the system, so that he does not have to keep contacting the information counter.  Mr. Karnilowitz mentioned that he has used the Zip plus 4 system with the U.S. Post Office and it is a great tool as he has never had a problem with finding the addresses.

President Walker stated that the Department is constantly in the process of upgrading the computer system, so any input is helpful.  President Walker said that the DBI is intending to do public meetings to get information to distribute about that process, so hopefully the Department would keep Mr. Karnilowitz noticed

6.

Discussion and possible action to review resumes of candidates for the position of Director of the Department of Building Inspection.

a.  Public Comment on all matters pertaining to the Closed Session.

b.  Possible action to convene a Closed Session.

c.  CLOSED SESSION:  Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and the San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10(b).

d.  Reconvene in Open Session to vote on whether to disclose any or all discussions held in Closed Session (Administrative Code Section 67.10(b).

Commissioner Murphy made a motion for a motion, seconded by Commissioner Theriault to convene to Closed Session.  The Commission voted unanimously to go into Closed Session at 11:07 a.m.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 060-06

Commissioner Hirsch left the meeting at 11:07 a.m.

The Commission reconvened in Open Session at 12:05 p.m.

Commissioner Theriault made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lee not to disclose any information discussed in Closed Session.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 061-06

7.

Discussion and possible action regarding the search for a new Director of the Department of Building Inspection, including setting criteria and establishing guidelines  for the search and selection of a new Director. [President Debra Walker]

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 she and Secretary Aherne would work on scheduling any Special Meetings in order to do the interviews.  President Walker said that she would like to see an update about the Joint Meeting and encouraged DBI and Planning staff to communicate towards that end.  President Walker stated that in January the Commission would be dealing with the budget, as well as hearing Department information on permit updates, seismic safety, and so on.  Secretary Aherne said that there would probably be an Abatement Appeals hearing at one of the meetings in January.

Mr. Tony Fu said that he believed he had the right to expose the perjured declarations given by DBI staff in a prosecution case costing taxpayers $4M.  Mr. Fu expressed that he thought the project sponsor was treated unfairly by the Department of Building Inspection.  Mr. Fu read several declarations made by DBI staff from the Electrical, Building, and Plumbing Inspection Divisions, and stated that Inspectors had made false statements on the declarations.  Mr. Fu said that DBI Managers and staff lied before the Commission and said that Commissioners had also lied.  Mr. Fu mentioned the following DBI staff during his public comment:  Jim Hutchinson, Frank Chiu, Amy Lee, Leo McFadden, Joe Duffy, Paul Ortiz, Steve Panelli, and the Deputy City Attorney.  Mr. Fu said that government officials consider themselves above the law and are taking the taxpayers money.  Mr. Fu stated that this is organized crime.  Mr. Fu urged other citizens of San Francisco to join him in fighting for justice for the decent people.

Ms. Gloria Argueta thanked the Commission for having a forum to state her opinion, and said that she would like to see more ethics and integrity in the Department of Building Inspection, especially with Carla Johnson.  Ms. Argueta said that she agreed with Mr. Fu.  Ms. Argueta stated that the Department said she did not have a permit when she did and said that DBI staff builds cases to send to the City Attorney so that people are sued for not making minor repairs.  Ms. Argueta said that she thought that the City Attorney and the Building Inspection Department should have different representation because it is a conflict of interest.  Ms. Argueta stated that   ethics are being confused and undermined because DBI and the City Attorney’s Office have to work together to make some earnings or profit out of lawsuits and that is a no-no.  Ms. Argueta stated that the City is supposed to represent the people and said that she was very disappointed that it does not.  Ms. Argueta said that the City Attorney and the Building Department form an alliance to damage hard-working people, residents, and owners of the houses in San Francisco, and said she thought that this was illegal.  Ms. Argueta said she has asked plenty of times to have a different Inspector handle her case because Mr. Andrew Karcs always lied on the reports, and said that the Department never assigned a different person even though Mr. Karcs has been promoted to a supervisor. 

Ms. Carla Johnson, Acting Deputy Director, stated that she works for the Department of Building Inspection, but was addressing the Commission as a member of the public.  Ms. Johnson said that she really hates to see the public comment portion of this calendar used to personally attack people in her Department that she has a lot of respect for.  Ms. Johnson stated that she has confidence in the staff that consistently does the right job, the right way.  Ms. Johnson said that any time names of people like Joe Duffy, Andy Karcs, or Ed Sweeney come up or someone makes unfair characterizations she feels like she needs to defend them, because these are fine people that do not deserve this kind of treatment.  Ms. Johnson said that she respects that the BIC has a public comment portion and staff wants to hear what DBI’s constituents are saying about what is right and wrong, but said that she felt that it has been used in this case to attack people unfairly.  Ms. Johnson said that she wanted to go on record with her statement.

President Walker said that the Building Inspection Commission has to allow people to do public comment and cannot edit what the public says, nor can the Commission verify that what is being said is truthful or accurate, but the Commission has to allow people to say what they want.  President Walker stated that the Commission and the Department are focused on ethics and a fair application of the building codes, which is the DBI’s and the BIC’s job.  President Walker said that she appreciates the staff’s efforts in that.  President Walker thanked Ms. Johnson.

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that in all the years he has been involved with DBI, the staff have been very lenient and very willing to work with people and cooperate and try to get things sorted out without going to the City Attorney.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that the cases that were just mentioned are very unusual.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that he had a meeting with a potential client the other day and the client had a ream of paper listing violations.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that the client asserted that he did nothing wrong, and Mr. Karnilowitz said that he had to tell the client that unfortunately he did.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that in instances like these people try to come to the Commission and say it has something to do with DBI staff when that is not true.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that the staff are doing an excellent job and all these stories are fabrications, and the Commission should not listen to people that do not have evidence behind what they say.

President Walker stated that the meeting would be adjourned in memory of Claudine Woeber, the Commission’s former court reporter that worked tirelessly to mark down all of their incessant remarks.

Commissioner Theriault made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Lee that the meeting be adjourned.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 063-06

Respectfully Submitted,


______________________
Sonya Harris
Assistant Secretary

Edited by,

______________________

Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary