Department of Building Inspection

2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998 1997 

BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)

Department of Building Inspection (DBI)

 

REGULAR MEETING

Monday, March 6, 2006 at 9:00 a.m.

City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 416

Aired Live on SFGTV Channel 78

ADOPTED MAY 1, 2006

 

MINUTES

President Walker said that she recently went with Department of Building Inspection (DBI) staff on a visit to San Jose to look at the systems in effect at their building department.   President Walker said that this reminded her of the wonderful process of the project of reorganization that is happening at DBI especially the computer revamping that is going on.  President Walker stated that she also sat in to listen to a presentation from one of the vendors who might be looking at working with DBI. President Walker said that she had asked Commissioner Grubb who sat on the City Task Force looking at the Information System for the San Francisco to work with the Department on behalf of the Commission.  President Walker thanked Commissioner Grubb for agreeing to do so.  President Walker also thanked Acting Director Lee for moving forward with the Information Technology (I.T.) process and said that the Department is working really hard to standardize procedures and systems to re-instill confidence in both staff and the public in delivering the permitting and inspection systems.  President Walker reemphasized the Commission’s commitment to public safety and efficient equitable customer service. 

 

President Walker thanked Acting Director Lee and Laurence Kornfield for the ongoing process for the Community Action Plan for Seismic Safety (CAPSS) and said that she would like an update on that program at a future meeting. 

 

President Walker reminded the Commissioners and staff that are required to fill out the Form 700, Declaration of Financial Interest that the forms are due on April 3, 2006.   Secretary Aherne announced that there would be a training on Ethics and the Sunshine Ordinance for the Commissioners on March 27, 2006 and said that she had sent an e-mail to the Commissioners with the details.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association (RBA) said that it was heartening to hear that something is being done about the inadequate computer system at DBI.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that he thought it was a mistake to try and make DBI’s system compatible with other departments in the City, as each department is unique.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that San Francisco is in such close proximity to Silicon Valley that DBI should have a model system for the whole country.  Mr. O’Donoghue spoke about the millions and millions of dollars that have been spent at DBI and other City departments on computer systems that have all failed and said that he hoped that DBI would get a system up and running as this long overdue.  

3.    Director’s Report.

       a.  Update on DBI’s Permit Tracking System.

 

Acting Director Lee said that she was excited to discuss this issue, but said that she is concerned about the potential pitfalls that the Department might run into.   Ms. Lee stated that in the past when staff or the Commission sought to improve the Department’s Information Systems there was no focus on the foundation of the infrastructure and only new technology was considered.  Ms. Lee said that the Department was looking at doing such things as hand held devices in the field without realizing that its main infrastructure was incapable of supporting any new initiatives.  Ms. Lee stated that the mission of the Department is to reengineer the DBI business process to allow the Department to provide the public with greatly enhanced and transparent services to be accountable in labor performance and financial transactions and offer seamless capability to share and update permit data with other City agencies. 

 

Ms. Lee said that for the past eight months the Department has been working on updating and improving the infrastructure and listed some of the highlights:

• Updated software to repair viruses and assist in emergency virus eradication
• Installed ghost imaging to aid in bringing failed computers up to speed as soon as possible
• Switch replacement and core network replacement upgrade to bring the Department up to City standards
• Building the foundation for the City-wide Permit Tracking System
• Completing the Gartner Group analysis of how to implement a City-wide Permit Tracking System – Studies to be completed in March and May ‘06

(Ms. Lee stated that DBI has partnered with Planning as well as other City agencies in this process that will ultimately help with the success of this initiative.)

• Leasing DBI’s equipment, network servers and some desktops so that every three years the Department will have state of the art technology
• The Department is looking to digitize all drawings to speed up the process, reduce the cost of maintaining documents and safeguarding documents
• Viewing of permit applications on line with signatures and markups

Ms. Lee said that the main thing DBI is working on now is the Permit Tracking Systems which will centralize data from many different agencies including, DBI, Planning, the Assessor’s Office, Department of Public Works, Fire Department and the Mayor’s Office on Disability and will help a host of other agencies such as Redevelopment and the Mayor’s Office of Housing.   Ms. Lee said that the information, which is now on 27 different databases in DBI, would be accessible by simply typing the address. 

 

Ms. Lee thanked DBI’s MIS staff and Sam Kwong of DTIS for their hard work and said that this team has been critical to the ultimate success of the IT program at DBI.   Ms. Lee also thanked Commissioner Grubb for his participation because he understands how difficult it is to get contracts approved and implemented in the City.  Ms. Lee stated that DBI is finally making great strides and said that the Department was looking to select a vendor to start working on the Gartner proposals by the end of summer. 

 

Ms. Lee said that the Department would encourage customers to come in as a working group to give their feedback to vendors and to help improve the system. 

 

President Walker said that she wanted to reiterate that not only is DBI updating what has to be done in preparation for moving forward, but is also establishing how to move forward with a whole revamp that incorporates the entire system.   President Walker spoke about San Jose’s GIS Mapping system and the ease with which customers can retrieve information regarding an entire block and what is laid out on it.  Ms. Lee said that DBI would be looking to do the GIS Mapping system in the future.  Ms. Lee explained that with the GIS mapping a customer could pinpoint an address where notification was required and the system would literally with the click of the mouse circle a radius and populate all of the addresses and send out a letter by fax, e-mail or prepare it for U.S. mail. 

 

Ms. Lee said that part of the infrastructure refresh is not just going to be the network servers, but all new desktop computers for staff. 

 

Commissioner Murphy asked if Acting Director Lee had visited other jurisdictions.   Ms. Lee said that she had not, but was looking into doing that in the summertime with some of the Deputies.  Ms. Lee stated that part of the Gartner study employed asking them to do benchmarking to other jurisdictions so that study will provide recommendations and/or comparisons and feedback on how successful those implementations were.  Ms. Lee said that she and some of her staff would go to local areas that have fantastic computer systems.  Commissioner Murphy said that he was familiar with the system in Phoenix, which he said was state of the art.

 

President Walker said that San Jose had a particular set of issues that had to be dealt with, some similar to San Francisco and some very different, but said that because everybody that is in the conversation is talking about doing the revamp it gives San Francisco more flexibility about the sort of vendor that will be chosen.   President Walker said that it was very informative to look at other jurisdictions.

 

Commissioner Grubb said that he sat in on one of the vendor presentations last week and said that the good new is that there is quite a variety of models out there that are being offered by the various vendors.   President Walker said that she was amazed how many off the shelf models that are available around municipal models.  Ms. Lee said that there are many similar models available in the market and DBI’s decision would be based on the success of other implementations and the staffing available to DBI for implementation.

 

Commissioner Theriault asked about the estimated cost of the program.   Ms. Lee said that the Department did not have any proposals so the numbers were very informal quotes received from the vendors, but as the Department moves forward the numbers will be more specific especially with the Budget Analyst’s review.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that in the past the Department has never defined what were the problems or the needs from vendors.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that this has been one of the failures of this system for years.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that there are all sorts of software programmers and brilliant engineers out there and if the Department defined its needs those experts could conceptualize those needs into a program and implement them.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department does not need massive information and data, as that is when the system breaks down with too much information that is not relevant.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that one thing the Department needs to implement is to insure when the system breaks down that customers can still call in and get an inspection.  Mr. O’Donoghue suggested that revenue projections be input into the system because three massive projects have been cancelled in the City and that means a huge loss of revenue.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the revenue projection would help with personnel needs and said that when the Board of Supervisors does something foolish or when there is suddenly a cut back in building because of higher interest rates the Department would be able to come to a conclusion of what the net effect is on revenues and perhaps know when to increase expenses.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that relevant data is necessary. 

 

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 regarding DBI’s Statement of Incompatible Activities.      [Acting Director Amy Lee]

 

President Walker said that this item had been heard before the Commission previously, changes had been made and Acting Director Lee had appeared before the Ethics Commission.

 

Acting Director Lee said that there was a very long meeting at the Ethics Commission.   President Walker said that she understood that DBI was one of the first departments before the Ethics Commission and actually served as an evaluative department so that is probably why it was so long.  Ms. Lee stated that initially the various departments drafted their own version in complying with the Proposition and then there was so much disparity and lack of standardization that the Ethics Commission went back and standardized all the departments templates and provided extensive language in making sure that the Statement of Incompatible Activities (SIA) incorporates some of the concerns that were previously raised by complains and issues at DBI and other departments.  Ms. Lee said that the Ethics Commission were very pleased with how much effort DBI put into this and pleased with the fact that many employee representatives came to the meeting and made really thoughtful comments.

 

Ms. Lee said that she had asked that some of the employees come before the BIC to share their comments, as some employees were concerned, that as written, this SIA would penalize, prohibit or hurt some employee’s ability to assist their neighbors.    Ms. Lee pointed out that changes had been made to the SIA to allow employees to volunteer with recognized charitable organizations. Ms. Lee stated that as she reported before there is a City requirement that City employees must disclose or seek approval of the Director of Human Resources for outside activities that they might engage in.  Ms. Lee said that this is a City rule, not DBI’s rule or the SIA.  Ms. Lee said that she would be issuing a memo to all staff requiring disclosure of any outside activities where the employee engages in any work or money is received.

 

Ms. Lee reported that another question raised by staff was the issue of maintaining an active license in the construction trade.   Ms. Lee stated that this was included on the SIA because there were complaints that employees with construction licenses were doing construction on the weekends.  Ms. Lee said that she worked with the City Attorney, the Ethics Department and Mr. Steve Nelson to delete that.  Ms. Lee said that enforcing the City’s current requirement about outside employment would sufficiently cover any concerns of the Department.  Ms. Lee said that if staff wanted to work on their own homes or the homes of families outside of San Francisco they would need to use their contractor’s license for permits and said that she did not want to take that away.    

 

Commissioner Murphy said that Senior Inspector Leo McFadden had made a presentation at the previous meeting regarding what an Inspector could or could not do and said that he did not want to penalize DBI employees if they are not doing anything wrong.   Ms. Lee said that this was the difficultly of this process because it is a Proposition that the Department has to comply with and the Ethics Commission has received complaints about DBI that they are looking into and have not necessarily shared any information with DBI.  Ms. Lee said that the Department did not want to over legislate the good in trying to prevent a bad activity.  Ms. Lee said that the Ethics Commission talked about the Commission adopting this SIA.  Ms. Lee said that she was working with the Ethics Commission to incorporate a method where an employee could receive assessment or permission prior to engaging in any activity.  Ms. Lee said that she was looking to find a way that if there is an error made on an employee’s behalf, as long as there is nothing nefarious about an activity, that there is a way out to protect employees.  Ms. Lee stated that DBI wants to empower its employees to do their job, to make decision in the field or at the desk and not be afraid of someone going back and twisting the facts and making false allegations. 

 

President Walker said that this SIA is trying to overlay the existing restrictions that already exist in the law and is trying to explain to staff how that applies to what the Department should be doing.   President Walker said that it would be a good thing to add a statement that if an employee questions an activity there is a way of addressing it with either their Supervisor or the Director to get approval prior to performing that activity.  President Walker said that an employee might be required to go before the Ethics Commission to get a waiver, but it is important that employees address things before rather than after.  Ms. Lee said that this is a dynamic documents that will go through the meet and confer process with the Unions and said that she was sure that it would change significantly once the meet and confer process is completed. 

 

Commissioner Grubb said that he understood that Director Lee was saying that there should be nothing in the SIA prohibiting an employee from assisting a neighbor or friend with some sort of permit or construction issues.   Ms. Lee said that was correct and said that she knew that some staff and union representatives read it differently.  Commissioner Grubb said that in looking at Section 1F and G of the SIA it says that no employee or officer may participate directly or indirectly in the construction, alteration or remodeling of structures within the jurisdiction of the Department.  Commissioner Grubb said that this sounds like it would include an employee’s next-door neighbor and said that he would hate to see a “gotcha” situation set up for the employees.  Ms. Lee said that the Department does not want staff to be helping a neighbor to do something that the public might not be aware of.  President Walker said the Department needs to provide equitable service so employees should not be doing things for some that they do not do for all; a neighbor should be provided with the same information an employee would offer to a customer who walks through the door. 

 

Acting Director Lee said that the Department was trying to address an issue where a staff member actually drew plans for a project and then had the customer submit the plans and the employee that drew the plans was doing the plan checking.   President Walker said that perhaps there should be some language that if this sort of issue comes up the employee would then disclose or remove themselves from the process.

 

Commissioner Romero said that he was familiar with this issue and some of the other classifications that exist in the City, such as with Mental Health classifications where there are psychologists under the City, but some have private practices that they charge for and have reported it to the City appropriately.   Commissioner Romero stated that he has not met many people in San Francisco who do only one thing, as many people have other jobs besides their daily job.  Commissioner Romero stated that he thought that as long as it is reported to the Director that should be allowed and said he was concerned that there are more restrictions than there needs to be. 

 

Acting Director Lee said that this is a difficult issue because when an employee discloses that they work as a drafter or an architect on the side the employee might not have to disclose the amount of clients that they have so the Department does not know how much time is devoted to that outside activity.   Ms. Lee said that since there is money involved with approving projects it is a little different than with mental health because there can be the perception that a customer is getting preferential treatment and indeed might be paying that architect at DBI more money in expectation of better service at the counter inside DBI.  Commissioner Lee stated that the Department does not want to give the public a false impression that the architect they are hiring works for DBI and will be able to help them get their permit, or that they have an inside track.  Commissioner Lee said that he would agree that this needs to be incompatible.      

 

Acting Director Lee said that the Department did not want to get into situations where staff would have to recuse themselves from many projects, as this would not be good for management. President Walker said that Commissioners have to get a waiver to do business in the Department. President Walker said that it is important for employees to be educated about providing good customer service and for the public to have trust in DBI and said that she wanted the Commission to do whatever it takes to support this process.

 

Commissioner Lee asked if the Department had a list of referral services that could be offered to the public when they call and ask where to find an Architect or a Contractor.   Ms. Lee said that this is an issue that the Department has been grappling with for some time especially when an emergency happens.  Ms. Lee said that it is difficult for the Department to rate vendors or contractors and keep them at hand because then DBI would become a monitoring agency and serving like a licensing board.  Commissioner Lee asked if someone called in for an Architect if the Department could refer that person to the American Institute of Architects (AIA).  Ms. Lee said that would be allowable.  Commissioner Lee asked if a list could be made up for the various organizations to help customers.  Commissioner Theriault said that in his position he gets requests all the time for referrals to contractors and said that his practice has been to refer them to somebody else to provide that information.  Commissioner Theriault said that he thought it would be appropriate to refer someone to an organization such as the AIA because that is not giving a specific recommendation. 

 

Mr. Leo McFadden introduced himself as President of the Building Inspector’s Association and said that he would agree with Commissioner Romero that if this document was intended to clarify or educate employees it falls short.   Mr. McFadden said that there were many union representatives at the last meeting to speak on this document and yet only deletion and one amendment had been incorporated.  Mr. McFadden stated that it is confusing and possesses pitfalls and penalties for employees.  Mr. McFadden said that there were interpretation problems at the Ethics Commission with the incompatible activities as this document is broad in some areas and specific in others.  Mr. McFadden said that he thought this needs to be sent back to the unions for discussion and there should be a workable draft before sending it on to the other Commissions. 

 

Mr. David Herring stated that he is a Housing Inspector with the Department of Building Inspection and President of the Housing Inspectors Association.   Mr. Herring said that the Housing Inspectors had no problem with the intent of this statement and commended Amy for her hard work in putting this statement together and for including the employees in the process.  Mr. Herring said that he would strongly urge the Commission not to approve this statement as it stands because there were a number of problems with it.  Mr. Herring said that in one section there is a sentence that says that no employee or officer may be employed by or provide services in exchange for compensation or anything of value from any individual or entity that is regulated by DBI, other than a family member.  Mr. Herring stated that this does not specify what the money would be for or whom the Department regulates.  Mr. Herring said that the Department regulates any property owner in San Francisco and the Department also regulates most businesses in San Francisco, so no employee would be able to receive anything from anybody in San Francisco.  Mr. Herring said that everyone is saying that this is not the intent, but said that he feared that years from now when there is a different Director or City Attorney involved and when there are different people on the Commission this might actually be taken literally.

 

Mr. Garland Simpson said that he was a Chief Steward for Local 790.   Mr. Garland said that this was his second time appearing before the Commission on this issue and said that he had also appeared before the Ethics Commission.  Mr. Simpson said that his chief issue with this document resides in the phrase “other than family members”.  Mr. Simpson said that the mission of DBI says that there should be fair application for all and this document seeks to actually create a privileged class and once a privileged class is created there is discrimination.  Mr. Simpson said that when he comes before an agency or board for any purpose as long as he is a taxpayer and a resident citizen of this City he would expect to be treated in the same way whether it is for services or for knowledge whether he would be a family member or not.  Mr. Simpson stated that there are many things in this document that need to be addressed with a very studied eye as this involves the lives and livelihoods of employees.  Mr. Simpson said that this document talks about penalties that are severe and jail time, but said it is not specific and does not go over the dos and don’ts.  Mr. Simpson said that this document does not address appeals and said that he did not find this document to be just in any way.

 

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz commended Acting Director Amy Lee for the hard work that has gone into this SIA, but said that he thought that some of the recommendations were Draconian.   Mr. Karnilowitz said that this document refers to application matters that were under review within the previous twelve months and said that this should not be retroactive, but should start on the day it is enforced.  Mr. Karnilowitz urged the Commission to send this document back to DBI for further consideration and said that the Commission should not vote on it as it stands.

 

Ms. Sue Hestor said that she has been dealing with these types of statements and these types of rules for about twenty or thirty years in the City and the State and said that this is not unusual.   Ms. Hestor stated that these are rules that apply in many government jurisdictions.  Ms. Hestor said that she thought that the extreme interpretations and apprehensions could be solved by having very clearly in the document after each statement the exact name and number of who to call regarding questions of interpretation.  Ms. Hestor said that this document should be issued regularly every year with a paycheck or in some way that the employees would have to sign that they received it.  Ms. Hestor suggested that the Department include a list of questions and interpretations as they come up as this would help give people some guidance and assurance that what they are doing is Kosher.  Ms. Hestor said that one thing that she hoped would be included somewhere is a provision that when people leave the Department they should be given the rules about what are the incompatible activities after they leave because there is a revolving door provision.  Ms. Hestor stated that this provision has been abused, not necessarily just by DBI, but by a lot of departments.  Ms. Hestor said that employees who do permitting have left and become consultants right away and said that there is a ban that follows those employees, as they are not supposed to become consultants on the side.  Ms. Hestor said that this SIA is not that onerous.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that this SIA is trying to legislate morality to the nth degree and goes under the assumption that all employees are sinners and that is incorrect.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that this perception came from a hostile press and from some ambitious political leaders.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that there was corruption, but it pertained to a specific section within the Department of Building Inspection and did not exceed 10% within that particular section.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department was dealing with this bias or favored treatment and the Department was enforcing the elimination of Plan Checkers doing work on the side.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that now there is this document that is so vague and frivolous that it could be turned into an indictment based on its language.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this is a nightmare that the entire Department has been exposed to and said that it was like taking a sledgehammer to killing ants.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this is a Pandora’s box for the future of the employees, is a travesty and said he was glad that the unions were getting involved against it. 

 

Mr. Mark Pope introduced himself as President of the Cathedral Hill Neighborhood Association and said that he had witnessed Building Inspectors working as contractors and said that those employees were pretending to be the Building Inspector for properties for which work was being done beyond the scope of the permit.  Mr. Pope stated that this employee was trying to make it look like he was the Building Inspector for the area when in fact that inspector was the contractor and was working in an area that was not his district.  Mr. Pope said that it was beyond his belief that someone can be a Building Contractor and a Building Inspector.

 

President Walker said that these comments were exactly why the Department and the Commission was going through this process and said that she would reiterate that this is a process that is happening throughout City government with every department and not just DBI.   President Walker stated that this process is for the Department’s benefit to avoid appearance or situations that appear to be in violations of conflict of interest and said that she personally takes this very seriously.  President Walker said that she heard the concerns about it and shares some of the descriptive issues that come up and asked if the Unions could possibly look at this prior to the BIC voting on it.  President Walker stated that she wanted to hear these issues addressed particularly around a better definition of what to do up front, of engaging in these kinds of activities with more of an explanation so there would be more of a process in educating as the Department and the Commission moves forward.  President Walker said that there is a portion of this document that says that people are allowed to do work or offer guidance and assist people in a way that they would assist anyone who walked in the door; however, if an employee is engaged in that project at any level they should recuse themselves. President Walker stated that there was nothing in the SIA addressing a process like that.

 

Commissioner Romero said that he was concerned with what the Unions would be concerned about as he does work at a Union and is a labor representative.   Commissioner Romero stated that his concern had to do with discipline and discharge and said that if someone brings false allegations against an employee this kicks in that whole process.  Commissioner Romero said that the other problem is that there is a very broad definition of what is inappropriate and said that he believes that folks are entitled to “moonlight” when they finish work at DBI.  Commissioner Romero stated that he had done work on the weekends and said that he thought that a lot of City employees do work outside of City time.  Commissioner Romero said that he was concerned about what would kick in the discipline and discharge component of all of this because ultimately that is what would happen.  Commissioner Romero stated that if somebody were accused of violating this code then the City would move to discipline the employee and discharge them.  Commissioner Romero said that he was concerned about how the City Attorney’s Office would interpret this as they have new people in the labor branch so it is hard to get someone with institutional knowledge of what the City’s practices are.  Commissioner Romero said that he believed that this would cause problems around people being charged with things that are probably not that serious.  Commissioner Romero said that he completely agreed that if somebody is using their position inappropriately with the City then there needs to be some movement from the City to make sure that does not happen anymore, but said that he thought this SIA was too broad. 

 

Commissioner Theriault said that he was comfortable with having a Code of Ethics and said that Thomas Aquinas believed it was appropriate to legislate with an eye toward creating morality.   Commissioner Theriault stated that, as a Union Official, he is by Federal law working under far stricter structures than this SIA provides. 

 

Commissioner Theriault made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Grubb, that this Statement of Incompatible Activities be referred to the City for meet and confer with the Unions and that that the Commission does so with the understanding that this document will return to the Commission altered and with a great many of the issues that the employees of the Department have concern over, having been addressed.

 

A roll call vote was taken and the motion carried unanimously.

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 013-06

 

Commissioner Grubb suggested that employee representatives submit any changes or concerns regarding the SIA to Acting Director Lee in writing.  Ms. Lee said that she had received e-mails and forwarded them to the City Attorney as well as the Ethics Commission.  President Walker said that this document would be coming back to the Commission and thanked Ms. Lee for all of her work on this issue.

 

6.    Discussion and possible action to adopt File 060188, Ordinance amending the San Francisco Housing Code by amending Section 1002 and amending the San Francisco Administrative Code by adding Chapter 41E to require residential hotel owners to provide a United States Postal Service-approved mail receptacle for each residential unit and by amending Section 37.14 to provide for an appeal to the Rent Board for violation of this requirement; adopting findings pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.5.  [Chief Housing Inspector Rosemary Bosque]

 

Chief Housing Inspector Rosemary Bosque said that her role today was to note to the Commission that this legislation amends Chapter 10 of the San Francisco Housing Code and is sponsored by Supervisor Daly.  Ms. Bosque commended Supervisor Daly, Deputy City Attorney Judith Boyajian, and other tenant advocates for allowing DBI to be in the initial discussion of the legislation which seeks to require, as an amendment to the Housing Code, a condition that would require residential hotel units to provide post office receptacles for permanent occupants so they would get the same type of service as someone living in a dwelling unit. Ms. Bosque said that this would only be for Residential Hotels as defined by Chapter 41 of the Administrative Code.  Ms. Bosque stated that unfortunately in Residential Hotels individuals who are in great need of getting their mail sometimes do not ever receive the mail because it can be dropped off and dumped on a counter or could be placed in an open slot area that is unsecured.  Ms. Bosque said that the Housing Inspectors while doing inspections at a Residential Hotel would be happy to look at and make sure these receptacles are there, but the delivery and type of receptacle is totally legislated by Federal law.  Ms. Bosque said that this legislation would go a long way to start to provide very essential services to individuals that occupy residential units within Residential Hotels. 

 

President Walker recused herself, as she is a tenant of a Residential Hotel and turned this item over to Vice-President Lee.  

 

Housing Inspector Jamie Sanbonmatsu working in the Code Enforcement Outreach Program.   Mr. Sanbonmatsu passed out a photo of mailboxes from a Chinatown Residential Hotel and a chart that showed additional information about hotels.  Mr. Sanbonmatsu stated that he has worked on issues pertaining to Residential Hotels for the past sixteen years, including ceilings caving in from leaks, feces smeared on walls, sprinklers, rules for visitors and much more.  Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that the mail is one intractable problem that will not go away and said that the Federal Government ought to address this, but will not.  Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that if he were the owner of a Residential Hotel he would support this legislation because there are so many hassles and accusations associated with improper handling of other people’s mail.  Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that this would be a combined effort led by the Board of Supervisors and Senator Feinstein and said that individual owners would not be stuck on their own getting nowhere with the U.S. Postal Service.

 

Acting Director Lee thanked staff for working on this issue.

 

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he thought that Housing did an excellent job in putting this all together and said that there is no doubt that this is a very personal issue as he would not like anyone else handling his mail.   Mr. Karnilowitz said that he did think that the Commission would need to look at some of the hotels where it might be physically impossible to put in these mailboxes.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that he would like to see a waiver or an exemption in this legislation for those hotels where this cannot be done physically. 

 

Mr. Paul O’Brien stated that he had lived in a Residential Hotel for twenty years and said that the problem is not the lack of adequate boxes, but the supervision of the people putting the mail in them.   Mr. O’Brien stated that he had problems with management in his building misfiling mail and throwing it away.  Mr. O’Brien said that even Residential Hotels that have the required mail receptacles are problematic because management is not delivering the mail to the residents.

 

Mr. Robert Calbona said that he lived in one of the SRO’s in the Mission District and said that there has been problems with the mail for the almost four years that he has lived there.   Mr. Calbona said that checks were sent to him that he never got and said that a Christmas present that was sent from Hawaii on December 10^th arrived in February because it was put in a stack of mail for the hotel owner.  Mr. Calbona urged the Commission to support this legislation. 

 

Ms. Barbara Lopez said that she works with the Central City SRO Collaborative and said that part of her work involves Code Enforcement, which is easy because DBI puts teeth into the Code. Ms. Lopez that the mailboxes are a problem because there is no affirmative solution and said that Mr. O’Brien had called the Federal Postal Service multiple times with no response as there is no accountability in this area.   Ms. Lopez stated that there is definitely mail fraud happening, as there are people at hotels where their SSI checks were not delivered.  Ms. Lopez stated that this legislation would benefit hotel managers along with the tenants by having them released from having any sort of responsibility in this area.  Ms. Lopez thanked DBI staff for supporting this legislation and asked that the Commission support it also.

 

Mr. Evio Lauser said that he thought that it would be a good idea to be able to have individual postal delivery to the building and the tenants, but said that in some cases it is a physical impossibility to actually have mailboxes.    Mr. Lauser said that in one building that he owns there is no lobby and he would need about 27 linear fee of wall space to put in receptacles and when the receptacles were opened there would be no room to make it down the hallway.  Mr. Lauser stated that he would have to take out two residential rooms in order to create a mailroom.  Mr. Lauser said that the postal service would not make deliveries to anywhere other than the lobby of a building so some of the owners would not have the ability to negotiate with the post office.  Mr. Lauser asked the Commission to consider an exemption when there is a physical impossibility to put in the mailboxes.

 

Mr. David Ho said that he was with the Chinatown Community Development Center and said that mailboxes are needed in Chinatown.   Mr. Ho stated that mailboxes have been one of the highest priorities for residents living in SRO’s.   Mr. Ho stated that his organization has received pledges from Senator Feinstein and Senator Pelosi’s Offices to make mail service a reality for SRO tenants and urged the Commission to support this issue.

 

Ms. Fang spoke to the Commission through an interpreter and said that she had been living in an SRO for ten years.   Ms. Fang said that she would feel more secure if there were individual mailboxes, as mail would be delivered on time to the right person.

 

Ms. Ting spoke to the Commission through an interpreter and said that she had been living in SRO’s for two years and said it was a struggle not getting her mail.   Ms. Ting stated that she hoped that she could get her own mailbox because this is the safest way for her to get one of the most things in her life. 

 

Mr. Arlo Duffy said that the services provided by these hotels has been changing as they started out to be low rent hotels with a high transience, but now it is high rent and people are staying around a lot longer.   Mr. Duffy stated that there is no reason that people who are living in a unit for an average of two and a half years should not have the same thing that everybody else has, which is a mailbox.

 

Mr. Sam Dodge of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic thanked DBI’s leadership in helping to navigate this problem.   Mr. Dodge said that mailboxes have been a long time issue, but there have always been fires, demolitions, conversions, mass evictions and things of that nature that have taken precedence.  Mr. Dodge said that the rest of the City is talking about wi-fi’s and these people are looking for mailboxes.  Mr. Dodge said that the Federal Code says that once a mailbox is installed in a boarding house or residential hotel that the postal service has to provide service, which means more postal workers and higher costs.  Mr. Dodge said that this has been part of the problem because the postal service does not want to do this.  Mr. Dodge thanked DBI for its support. 

 

Mr. Joe Simmons said that he lived in an SRO and said that lockable mailboxes would be the way to go because most of the problem exists because there is not just one person responsible for mail in his hotel, but five.   Mr. Simmons said that the owners should come up with a couple of bucks from somewhere to install the mailboxes.

 

Mr. Earl Brown said that he was an organizer in the Mission SRO Collaborative and works with tenants in the Residential Hotels in the Tenderloin and Mission.   Mr. Brown said that many of the people working in these hotels are overburdened and under trained and this causes a lot of the problems with the mail.  Mr. Brown said that people living in these SRO’s are paying 50 to 75% of their income for rent and get government paychecks, government assistance and doctor’s information in the mail so they cannot afford to suffer the risk of lost or misdelivered mail.  Mr. Brown said that he was willing to work with tenants and owners to make this happen.

 

Mr. Tony Robles with the Mission Tenant Collaborative said that some of the problems with mail in the SRO’s happen because the person distributing the mail might have something against one of the tenants.   Mr. Robles said that these people in SRO’s deserve to be treated as first class citizens and mail service is a very basic thing.  Mr. Robles asked the Commissioners to support this legislation because this is a quality of life issue.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the RBA said that this is a basic inalienable human right’s issue.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that when this Commission was formulated through the joint help of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic and the Residential Builders many years ago, it was then discussed that all people needed the same due process rights and the same inalienable rights to quality of life.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that in an apartment every tenant has the right to mail delivery and it should be the same for SRO’s as these people are permanent tenants for all practical purposes.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if there was any argument from the Federal Government then a lawsuit should be filed alleging discrimination.  Mr. O’Donoghue urged the Commission to pass this legislation.

 

Chief Building Inspector Rosemary Bosque said that she had four points of information to offer to the Commission:

 

1. The SRO Task Force that was formed by the Board of Supervisors has been used as a vehicle to get the information about the legislation out and that is why there were property owners and their representatives present today; they are aware that the legislation is being contemplated.
   
2. Ms. Bosque suggested to Supervisor Daly’s Office that another thing that could be considered to make this more meaningful and successful is that the Human Services Agency consider this a condition of the Care Not Cash or Master Lease Program for Residential Hotels that go into those programs; it would be mandatory that they provide the proper Post Office receptacles to the residential tenants.
   
3. In talking with the City Attorney the Department is confident that because this proposed Amendment would amend State laws to what a substandard condition is within a building the Department could make findings.
   
4. With respect to those property owners that think that perhaps they would not physically have the conditions to comply with this, as the Department did with the Sprinkler Ordinance, there should not be a provision added that should be considered as they go through this process in working with the Postal Service.   If there is a point in the future where staff and the property owner disagrees, the Department has administrative hearing processes.  The property owner could go before a Hearing Officer or this body as the Abatement Appeals Board to have the Commissioners hear their argument.

Ms. Bosque urged that the Commission move forward with this legislation.

 

Commissioner Theriault said that he felt that even if this legislation is not a complete solution, it was an important step in the direction of getting the tenants of SRO’s the mail they need to live their lives in a proper way.

 

Commissioner Theriault made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Murphy, that the Commission support this legislation. 

 

Commissioner Grubb said that he had further comments and said that he understood that Senator Feinstein was involved in trying to move legislation to require the Postal Service to do this and asked if his understanding was correct.

 

Ms. Bosque said that she was involved in a meeting with Senator Feinstein’s Office recently and at this point in time the Senator is looking into this matter.   Ms. Bosque stated that Senator Feinstein’s staff was assisting the sponsors of the legislation in getting to the right people in the Post Office to talk to, to see if these issues could be resolved in a meeting situation.  Ms. Bosque stated that Senator Feinstein’s staff was very interested in these issues.

 

Housing Inspector Jamie Sanbonmatsu said that this is in the Postal Code, but the difficulty has been in making them comply with their own laws.   Vice-President Lee asked if anyone had spoken to the Post Office.  Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that members of the community have been meeting with the Post Office for a long time and said that perhaps with help from the leadership in Washington some progress could be made.

 

Commissioner Grubb said that in reading the legislation he understood that DBI’s Housing Division does not have enforcement responsibilities.   Ms. Bosque said Housing’s responsibility would be to do an inspection to check that the proper number of receptacles for the number of certified residential guest rooms is in place.  Ms. Bosque said that then the delivery and maintenance of the receptacle, because of Federal Statutes, would be between the property owner and the United States Postal Service.

 

Commissioner Grubb asked if a citation would be issued that the Rent Board would be able to look back to, in order to determine that there is a violation.   Ms. Bosque said that was correct; this violation would be added to the Notice of Violation during a routine inspection or a complaint.  Commissioner Grubb asked if there should be wording in the legislation that would speak to the problem of it being physically impossible to install the mail receptacles in certain buildings.  Ms. Bosque said that as with the Fire-Sprinkler Ordinance she would not recommend such wording for exemption or waiver and that the property owner would have the right of appeal as with any other Housing Code violations.

 

The Commissioners voted on the question as follows:

The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 014-06

President Walker resumed as Chair of the meeting.

 

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.  Copies of thank you letters written on behalf of DBI employee and response from Acting Director Lee.

 

8.   Review Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.

• 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.
• 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.

Secretary Aherne announced that at the next meeting there would be two appeals to be heard and said that the appellant has requested that the appeals be heard when all Commissioners would be present.  President Walker asked that if any Commissioner would not be present on the meeting of March 20, 2006 that they inform the Secretary as soon as possible.

 

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

 

Ms. Sharon Loeb stated that she has lived at 921 Central in a single family home for over 22 years.  Ms. Loeb said that the property owners adjoining her property decided to do a construction project, which is having a detrimental effect on her property.  Ms. Loeb stated that this project was approved without her ever having seen the plans and said that she was so nervous about the project that she did not go to the Board of Permit Appeals within the appeal time limit.  Ms. Loeb said that as a result of the work being done next door her foundation was cracked.  Ms. Loeb said that she had expressed her concerns to the Building Inspection Department and when the Inspector actually viewed the site she received a Notice of Violation on her property; Ms. Loeb said that she was not satisfied that the Building Department was addressing her issues.  Ms. Loeb explained that she was worried about her foundation being undermined and her house falling down. Ms. Loeb said that she had requested a block book notation with the Planning Department, but was never given an opportunity to view the plans.

 

President Walker asked that Director Lee communicate with Ms. Loeb regarding this situation and report back at the next meeting.   President Walker thanked Ms. Loeb for coming to the meeting.  Ms. Loeb stated that she had been in contact with Chief Inspector Carla Johnson and said that Ms. Johnson could let Ms. Lee know what the problems were.

 

10.   Adjournment.