Department of Building Inspection

Building Inspection Commission

BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)
Department of Building Inspection (DBI)

Wednesday, August 6, 2003
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 408

Adopted Wednesday, August 20, 2003

MINUTES

The regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 1:35 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, excused
Roy Guinnane, Commissioner, excused
Rodrigo Santos, Commissioner
Matt Brown, Commissioner, excused
Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary

D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:

Frank Chiu, Director
Jim Hutchinson, Deputy Director
William Wong, Deputy Director
Taras Madison, Administration & Finance
Sonya Harris, Secretary

2. President's Announcements.

President Fillon had no announcements.

3. Director's Reports. [Director Frank Chiu]

a. Report on the status of future State and San Francisco Building Code.

Director Chiu said that item #3a was to report on the status of the future State and San Francisco Building Codes. Director Chiu reported that whenever the State adopts a new Code then there is a certain period, approximately six months; the City must adopt the State Code in conjunction with local amendments. Director Chiu said that what happened on July 29, 2003 the Building Standards Commission under the State of California chose to adopt NFPA 5000 over the ICC Building Code and this will have some impact on San Francisco particularly the if format changes from the current ICC Code and certainly the Department will need to send staff to be trained on the new Code. Director Chiu stated that, as of today, the Department does not have the date as to when the State will enforce the new Code. Director Chiu stated that there is a meeting on September 17^th to discuss the timeframe. Director Chiu said that he remembered talking about this particular item before the Commission a while back as to what was happening. Director Chiu said that nationwide, previously there were three writing Code bodies, the ICBO, BOCA and the Southern Building Code writers, but about three years to five ago these bodies met and decided to consolidate into one Code writing body that became the ICC. Director Chiu stated that nationwide there is a goal to have a uniform Building Code for the entire industry, but while that was happening four or five years ago the ICBO and some of the Code writers for plumbing and mechanical fought and as a result there was a split and then this went through a lengthy litigation process and finally these plumbing and mechanical code writers decided they would do their own Building Code writing as well. Director Chiu reported that these people went into a joint venture with the Western Fire Chiefs and developed their own Code, which is now called the NFPA 5000 Code. Director Chiu said that, as a result, last week the State chose to adopt that new Code. Director Chiu said that at this time he did not have all of the information as to what the actual impact this is going to have on DBI, but said that it was his understanding that the State law is still allowing the local agencies to adopt their amendments so he did not anticipate San Francisco losing those local amendments. Director Chiu said that he would keep the Commission informed as the Department hears more from the State.

Vice-President Hood stated that she thought this was a very big item and said she wished very much that the Director had brought it to the attention of the Commission before it came up. Vice-President Hood said that it would have been a good idea for the BIC to write a letter to the powers that be expressing whatever opinion the Commission would come up with because it is such an enormous change and has enormous implications to the retraining of all of the staff at DBI. Vice-President Hood said that she really thought that the BIC should have known about this and had an opportunity to comment on it before it became a fact.

Mr. Ken Cleaveland stated that he was representing the Building Owners and Managers Association (BOMA). Mr. Cleaveland said that he was in Sacramento the day that the Building Standards Commission adopted NFPA 5000 and said that the vote was eight to two. Mr. Cleaveland said that after two long days of testimony, at which two to one the testimony was in favor of adopting the International Codes, not the NFPA 5000. Mr. Cleaveland said that, in fact, the California Building Officials Association (CALBO), local building officials, has been strongly supportive of the adoption of the International Codes and primarily because the International Building Codes is more prescriptive, more detailed and gives more information to the customer, designer and to the local building officials so that they know what is exactly required before they go into the construction process. Mr. Cleaveland stated that unfortunately, the NFPA is a lot more vague and is not nearly as complete and is more open to onsite interpretation. Mr. Cleaveland said that BOMA hates that as people who own and manage properties they would like to know how they have to design and build a property before they are into the process because it is so much more expensive after the fact. Mr. Cleaveland said that BOMA was very disappointed with the Commission's actions and hoped that the BIC would write a letter to the Commission urging them to reconsider their position on this. Mr. Cleaveland stated that he could not tell the BIC how important it was going to be to all Californians, the customers of construction services statewide and the citizens who ultimately pay the cost for this huge change to a Code that is much more vague, not as complete and much more expensive to implement. Mr. Cleaveland stated that this Code is much more out of step with the rest of the country, which has been adopting the International Codes. Mr. Cleaveland said that he hoped the State of California would listen to the cries of all the local jurisdictions around the State and reconsider that ill-fated decision last week.

Vice-President Hood asked Mr. Cleaveland when this was going to be implemented. Mr. Cleaveland said that it would be phased in and it would be a three-year process. Mr. Cleaveland said that the State would continue to operate under UBC 97 for the next three years and there is going to be a lot of training. Mr. Cleaveland stated that NFPA has promised that they would pay for all of the training for all local Building Officials statewide on the new Code and that there will be no cost to local governments because this is an unfunded mandate from the State. Mr. Cleaveland stated that the State is saying that there is going to be this whole new Building Code that the jurisdictions are going to have to comply with, but the State is not giving any money to train all of the Inspectors and Plan Reviewers to know what this Code is all about. Mr. Cleaveland said that NFPA has volunteered and says that they are going to put on seminars and do it. Mr. Cleaveland said that implementation would be at least three years and it is one hundred eighty days from when the Code is published that the local governments have to adopt it and abide by it. Mr. Cleaveland said that this means that this new Code won't be seen on the street until 2006 assuming that the decision is not reversed. Vice-President Hood asked if that meant that it had been published yet. Mr. Cleaveland said no; it had not been published yet. Vice-President Hood said that when it is published the BIC would have to look at it. Mr. Cleaveland said that would be three years down the road, but for the next three years the City would be continuing to operate under the UBC 97. Vice-President Hood said that the Commission would have to adopt it within three months after it is published and that made her regret even more that the Commission did not have a chance to comment on the front end. Mr. Cleaveland said that at least the local building officials association was there and was strongly supportive, but Mr. Cleaveland stated that he wished BOMA had representation from San Francisco. Mr. Cleaveland said that the Fire Department was there and the Fire Department was supporting NFPA. Vice-President Hood said that the Fire Department was going to make a fortune off of this Code. Vice-President Hood said that she read the financial analysis of the issues, but had not read the NFPA Code and asked if the Department could furnish the Commissioners with a copy of that. Mr. Cleaveland said that until last week the only jurisdiction that had adopted the NFPA 5000 Building Code was Pasadena, Texas. Mr. Cleaveland thanked the Commission. Vice-President Hood asked who exactly adopted this Code and what was the process. Mr. Cleaveland said that the Commission comprised of ten members and voted eight to two to adopt it and they are appointed by the Governor and there is only one seat available on the Commission currently representing the structural engineers. Mr. Cleaveland stated that there is no recourse that he is aware of unless the decision is reversed or a new Commission is appointed. Vice-President Hood said that could happen soon and asked what was the technical name of the Commission. Mr. Cleaveland said it was the California Building Standards Commission.

b. Report on the draft Memorandum of Understanding between the Mayor's Office and City Planning Department on the use of Building permit fees.

Director Chiu said that with item #3b he was looking for some guidance from the Commission as the Commission was aware from a few meetings ago that there was some discussion about DBI being asked to help out other City sister agencies such as Planning, Fire and the Environment. Director Chiu stated that although both the Commission and the Department rejected the idea, he wanted to report that the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors moved and transferred the monies to those agencies. Director Chiu said that the Commissioners had a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that he was asked to sign and said that he did not feel comfortable signing or being a party to this MOU. Director Chiu sated that his position was that they took the money over DBI and the BIC's objections and wanted to just leave it at that and if anybody wanted to sign a MOU then they should sign it among themselves rather than making DBI a party to it. Director Chiu said that this was not an action item, but he just wanted the Commission to know that he was not going to sign it. Vice-President Hood said that she would agree that Director Chiu should not sign it. Vice-President Hood asked if this item could be agendized for more discussion. President Fillon asked what kind of action Vice-President Hood would want to take as a future item. Vice-President Hood said that she was talking about the NFPA issue. President Fillon said that the Commission was now on item #3b, but could agendize item #3a. Vice-President Hood said that regarding the MOU she wanted to state for the record that the BIC opposes it and understands why it was done, but it was done counter to the Commission's desires.

Director Chiu said that usually when a Department signs a MOU it means that an agency is giving money to another agency to perform some kind of work and usually the Department monitors what kind of work is done. President Fillon said that signing it would put some responsibility back on the Department. Director Chiu said that the Commission did not have to take any action and that he was going to respond back saying that he is not going to sign it. Commissioner D'Anne said that the MOU asks for $2.3M and when the page is turned to the final version there is an amount of $3.59M and asked what that reflected. Ms. Madison, Administration and Finance Manager said that the Commission only had a copy of one of the MOUs, which was an understanding between the Planning Department and DBI; however, the spreadsheet had other departments listed. Ms. Madison said that the MOU only covered the $2.3M for the Planning Department the remainder of the $3.6M includes some monies that are going to Public Health, the Department of the Environment and Fire. Director Chiu said that $2.3M is going to Planning alone. Commissioner D'Anne asked if the Commission were to approve this would it actually be $3.6M. Ms. Madison said that it was $3.6M for those four different departments. Commissioner D'Anne asked if DBI would be responsible for that money. Ms. Madison said that it was already taken.

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. Review, discussion and possible action regarding the BIC Grand Jury Response Committee's reply to the Civil Grand Jury Report on the Management of the Department of Building Inspection. [President Fillon, Vice-President Hood, Commissioner Brown]

Vice-President Hood said that the Committee met a number of times to go through the Grand Jury Report step by step and a representative of the Grand Jury, Mr. McNulty, came to two of the meetings to answer questions, which was very helpful to the Committee in understanding how the Grand Jury developed this critique. Vice-President Hood stated that a draft was then prepared by the Department and the Committee reviewed it and made some revisions so the draft in front of the Commission today was a second draft. Vice-President Hood said that the Committee felt that this draft was in good enough shape to bring to the Commission for review. Vice-President Hood said that she thought there was enough time for this item to be continued until the next meeting for final approval. Director Chiu said that the reply needed to be sent by August 11, 2003. Vice-President Hood said that the other Commissioners only received it today. Secretary Ann Aherne said that the Commissioners had received a copy the day before. President Fillon said that he was very comfortable with the reply. Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to make some editorial changes and pick up a few typos. Vice-President Hood stated that if more lines were skipped in between each paragraph and in between each bulleted item it would make it far more readable. Vice-President Hood said that a few of the paragraphs were just too long to follow. Vice-President Hood said that she only had editorial changes, there were no content changes and perhaps she could just talk them over with the writer to make it more readable. President Fillon said that would be acceptable. President Fillon stated that sometimes he felt that the language was a little heavy handed and would prefer that more of the content would be the strong point as opposed to the language, but it is fine as staff has a right to express itself in the way that it has. Commissioner Santos said that he thought it was a very well written response and was ready to sign it or whatever needs to be done. President Fillon stated that he wanted to thank staff that worked on the reply because they did a good job in a short amount of time and really hit as many of the points that the Committee and the Commission focused on in the meetings. President Fillon asked for any public comment.

Mr. Randy Shaw, Director of Tenderloin Housing Clinic, said that people have said to him that people don't pay much attention to these reports and why should the Department and the Commission get so upset about the report. Mr. Shaw stated that he has replied that these phony reports kind of build on each other and a year from now it will be out there that the Civil Grand Jury said this and if the Department doesn't respond to these things they become the building blocks of just this whole fake case built against the Department. Mr. Shaw said that he thought that this draft reply was just tremendous and said that he thought that the tone was perfect and any department would be proud to have such a well written response. Mr. Shaw said that the response tells the Grand Jury that they don't know what they are talking about and shows that the Department did listen to Grand Jury Reports even though this report says that the Department did not. Mr. Shaw stated that he thought this response captured in a very legalistic way given the fact that the Supervisors actually read this document and said that a cover letter should be sent to the Supervisors saying that a lot of stuff comes across their desks, but this is really worth reading because the Boards false conceptions otherwise will prevail. Mr. Shaw said that he thought that the Commission did a tremendous job in a short amount of time in putting this together.

Vice-President Hood said that one of the things that she wanted to say about getting it out there was that she understood that the Controller actually summarizes what the Commission has said and then puts it on the Grand Jury site. Vice-President Hood said that she would like to ask the Controller to refer it for the full text to DBI's website and to put this entire document on DBI's website so it would be easily accessible to the public. Vice-President Hood said that she thought this was a very reasonable request. President Fillon asked if it was allowable to send a copy of this report directly to the Board of Supervisors. Vice-President Hood stated that it was a public document. Mr. Shaw said that he hoped that could happen otherwise the Board won't hear about it. Vice-President Hood stated that she thought the BIC needed to talk about how to distribute this. President Fillon asked for any public comment.

Mr. Joe O'Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he agreed with Mr. Shaw that this is an excellent document that is done as a brief and regarding that the language is too strong; as far as Mr. O'Donoghue is concerned the language is too weak. Mr. O'Donoghue said in looking at the fact that this Department has been disparaged including people outside of the Department; there is no way to redress fire except with fire especially when that fire had no foundation and was so inflammatory. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that the remarks were somewhat muted because it deals with it only in the first paragraph, but then it goes factually and tries to respond to a document that was absent and noted for the absence of actual facts. Mr. O'Donoghue said that this made it very difficult. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the Rules Committee is going to be calling for a hearing on this document, on the Grand Jury Report and Matt Gonzales and Tony Hall have already scheduled it. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that this is just the beginning of a process where once and for all the good name of this Department is going to cleared and show that it is the best working Commission that there is in the City. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the BIC has the best results of any Commission in the City and nothing came out about that. Mr. O'Donoghue said it is time to beat the Department's own drum. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that he went through the Conflict of Interest Statements of that Grand Jury and they can't even fill out a Conflict of Interest report properly and these are the people coming in with an expertise and passing judgment on a Department that has done everything right under private industry standards. Mr. O'Donoghue said that then this Grand Jury has the audacity to criticize this Department. Mr. O'Donoghue stated that in the way it has been done is that any jurist, attorney or judge reading this document, it stands on four feet fair and square and takes off the blemish because it puts the onus back on the Grand Jury. Mr. O'Donoghue said that the Grand Jury ignored the request of the prime document writer, Mr. Ken Harrington, to give the factual data and it has been hidden. Mr. O'Donoghue said that this documentation would be obtained eventually because the Department has not exhausted any of the remedies yet, the Sunshine Ordinance and all other avenues that are open. Mr. O'Donoghue said that this is the best response and there has never been any response to any Grand Jury report that he has read over the years as has been contained in this document. Mr. O'Donoghue said that it shows that this is a Department that is finally going to be used as a model especially after the hearing at the Rules Committee. Mr. O'Donoghue thanked the Commission.

Mr. Ken Cleaveland said that he was representing the Building Owners and Mangers Association (BOMA). Mr. Cleaveland said that he had not had a chance to read the official response back from the Department on this Civil Grand Jury Report, but said that he did send a letter to the Grand Jury and copies were distributed to the Commissioners. Mr. Cleaveland said that his letter was about BOMA's particular take on the Grand Jury Report. Mr. Cleaveland stated that a lot of the it was good, and a lot of it is not so good so it is sort of one of those things that should not just be broad brushed and thrown it or accept all of it. Mr. Cleaveland said that DBI and the BIC needed to look at what the Grand Jury report says and take the constructive criticisms that are in there and put them into practice and those that are not valid, discard. Mr. Cleaveland stated that some of the things that BOMA was concerned about as commercial property owners was the idea of having a central intake. Mr. Cleaveland said that BOMA was very concerned about not having a separate line for commercial and that was very important because they did not want to have somebody pulling a permit for a deck for their home in the same line as somebody pulling a permit for OTI work for a full floor office building. Mr. Cleaveland said that BOMA would hope that would not happen as part of the recommendations. Mr. Cleaveland stated that there is a lot of good in the report and said that he hoped the Commission would look at his letter dated July 21, 2003. Mr. Cleaveland stated that he would not take the time to go through all of the specifics, but said that he did review the report in quite some detail and believes that the Department and the Controller's Office are going to have a much closer working relationship going forward as a result of this Grand Jury Report. Mr. Cleaveland thanked the Commission.

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that first of all he would like to thank everybody on the Commission for supporting the Department and working through the Committee meetings to help staff craft this response. Mr. Hutchinson said that certainly the employees should know about all of the good comments and all of the Commission's support because it is with the Commission's help that the Department is able to do this today. Mr. Hutchinson stated that he was very proud of the response that is being made, as it is a strong response. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Civil Grand Jury, whatever their intentions were, he thought were political in nature and said that the felt that the Civil Grand Jury made a major miscalculation. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Civil Grand Jury thought that they could come in and malign DBI and the Department would take it. Mr. Hutchinson said that this really is the straw that broke the camels back and the Department has to be strong by saying what it does and by being proud of what it does and standing up for the employees. Mr. Hutchinson said that DBI employees are strong, hard working people and were they not, the Grand Jury would have reported instances and they couldn't do it because the instances don't exist. Mr. Hutchinson said that he was appalled by the tone of the Grand Jury and in a way it might be the best thing that could have happened because it got everybody on their feet and the Department is fighting and pointing out the truth and are going to continue to fight. Mr. Hutchinson said that he wanted to thank the Commission, the public members and everybody that rallied around the Department to say this was an outrage, a lie and it is not going to be accepted. Mr. Hutchinson said he wanted to thank the people of the Department and said that he appreciated everyone. Vice-President Hood asked if all of the employees received a copy of the Grand Jury Report. Mr. Hutchinson said that they did and said that the Department made sure that all employees got a copy because it was important. Vice-President Hood said that when the response is finalized she would like for all of the employees to get a copy. Mr. Hutchinson said that the employees would get a copy and said that he thought that the employees would be very proud of the response.

Commissioner Santos said that Vice-President Hood mentioned getting the response on the DBI website. Vice-President Hood said that it definitely should be on the DBI website because she understood that in going to the Grand Jury website they have all of their report in full there, but they don't put the full response on that website so the Controller summarizes it. Vice-President Hood said that what always happens when somebody summarizes something they will lose the tone that the Committee worked so hard to achieve and lose a lot of the very strong points. Vice-President Hood said that if the Controller will not put the whole thing on, and that should be the first choice, then the whole thing should be on DBI's website and indicate how to get to that on the Controller's summary by saying the DBI and the BIC made a joint response and the full text is available on the DBI website. President Fillon asked if there was any money available to have a mailer go out to DBI's mailing list or organizations. Director Chiu asked if President Fillon was talking about sending these out to the various organizations and said that DBI does keep a list of all the clients and customers that the Department has. President Fillon said that this was a great response and was concerned that nobody would see it. Vice-President Hood said that she would like to request from the Grand Jury their distribution list and make sure that every person that received a copy of the report also receives a copy of the response. Commissioner D'Anne asked about doing a press release on this. Vice-President Hood said that the Department could try, but unfortunately DBI or the BIC is not very successful in getting positive things said about the Department in the Chronicle. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that televising the meeting would help and in addition the Department should look into any other ways to get this out. Commissioner D'Anne said that she thought the response was excellent especially with the time limits that had to be followed. Vice-President Hood said the BIC Committee had excellent help from the Department. President Fillon stated that the response required staff to come up with a lot of information in a very short period of time, which was key in making a successful response to have information and facts counter a lot of the allegations that were presented as facts in that Grand Jury Report.

Vice-President Hood made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Santos that the Commission approve the draft in agenda item #5 with the understanding that only a few formatting changes would be made. The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 036-03

6. Review, discussion and possible action regarding Code Enforcement Outreach Program contracts for 2003/2004 fiscal year.

Director Chiu stated that Commissioner Matt Brown who was not going to be present until 4:00 p.m. requested this item. President Fillon said that the Commission would skip this item and come back to it in order to try and wait for Commissioner Brown.

Mr. Randy Shaw of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic asked if he could speak to this item. President Fillon said that the Commission would hear public comment on this item.

Mr. Shaw said that this item involves the Code Enforcement Outreach Program. Mr. Shaw stated due to some staff at the Human Rights Department this contract was delayed. Mr. Shaw said that it would be good if the BIC could hear this item if there was no opposition even if Commissioner Brown did not show up. Mr. Shaw said that this should have been done in June, but due to this behavior by the Human Rights Commission staff that is claiming that the groups have to have general contractors performing some of the work. Mr. Shaw said that this is completely nuts and the Mayor's Office has intervened and is trying to clear it up. Mr. Shaw thanked the Commission.

Mr. Joe O'Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he would reaffirm what Mr. Shaw had said because Code Enforcement is one of the basis for the foundation of this Department and it has been very effective. Mr. O'Donoghue said that even though delays are necessary they were not brought about because of any problems, opposition or disputes within the Department, but it is because of problems with another outside Commission, which have now been resolved. Mr. O'Donoghue thanked the Commission.

President Fillon said that the Commission could take action even though Commissioner Brown was not present. Director Chiu said that it was his understanding that this item was not to approve the contract because staff already moved forward with that, but the holdup is at the Human Rights Commission because they have questions. Director Chiu stated that he thought that Commissioner Brown just wanted to talk about this and see what else the Commission could do to move this forward. Director Chiu said that several of the Board of Supervisors, along with the Mayor's Office had tried to urge the Human Rights Commission to support these current contracts. Director Chiu said that this really wasn't an action item because it was already approved by the fact the Commission approved it in the budget. Director Chiu said that he thought that Commissioner Brown was concerned about the delay and wanted to express his concern and urge the Commission to support these groups in getting the contracts moving.

Program Coordinator Jamie Sanbonmatsu passed around some photos of some of the work that is being done out in the community. Mr. Sanbonmatsu stated that Chief Housing Inspector Rosemary Bosque asked him to brief the BIC on the progress Housing Services is making with the Code Enforcement Outreach Program as well as some of the difficulties that the Department is facing. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that he and Ms. Bosque had been working very closely together appearing before the Civil Service Commission and had gotten some very positive feedback from the Commissioners who said that they wanted the funding to go for direct services. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that as the Department was preparing the RFP, however, Assistant Director Amy Lee directed Housing to send this to the Human Rights Commission as the Department wanted to ensure that the process was proper. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that this was done last May and when the Department heard back from the Human Rights Commission they insisted on a 15% fee to be set aside for consultants. Vice-President Hood asked if this was for women and minority owned firms. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that was true. Vice-President Hood said that maybe DBI already met that criterion. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that 80% of the groups fall into that category. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that it would just take a letter back to the HRC to state that and they have all kinds of forms that have to be filled out, but Amy or Taras would be good at that. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that the problem the Department is having is that the HRC does not recognize a non-profit to qualify under their guidelines and some of the non-profit organizations were disappointed to hear that because they are minority and women run groups. Vice-President Hood stated that she thought that Department needed to talk to somebody else there because she did not think that was the case. Vice-President Hood said that she had started to learn a lot about the HRC on other things, but this just did not make sense to her. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that it did not make sense to him either. Vice-President Hood said that the only thing she could think of was that the Human Rights requirement of minority participation would not apply to non-profits as they might have been excused and it might apply only to private business. Vice-President Hood stated that she thought that what the HRC wanted was that on all City contracts to have some minorities and women involved and the percentage is different on different jobs. Vice-President Hood said that all that needs to happen is that the non-profit group needs to fill out the form, sign it and turn it back to HRC and it should be fine. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that the Department had been back and forth with HRC since May over this issue and HRC insists that non-profit organizations don't count, don't qualify and HRC keeps giving the Department lists of consultants that they want the Department to use.

President Fillon asked if the non-profits would have to hire some contractors to do the work anyway or do they do it themselves. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that the non-profits do the work themselves. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that the BIC has said in the past that the money should go for direct services, and so have the Board of Supervisors, the Civil Service Commission, and Local 21, but the Human Rights Commission keeps giving the Department lists of consultants, community relations consultants and public relations consultants that they want to have a certain amount of the funding allocated to. Vice-President Hood said that she thought this was because those paid people are thinking of fulfilling the contract for a certain portion of it, but said that Mr. Sanbonmatsu should talk to the Executive Director and see if this can't be straightened out. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that he had talked to the Executive Director. President Fillon said that the system is set up so that money goes to non-profits, but with the thinking that the non-profits are going to hire contractors and then they have to meet these goals. President Fillon stated that this is how it is done at the MOCD, but this is kind of different.

Vice-President Hood said that if there are employees who meet the requirement the work does not have to be farmed out. Mr. Sanbonmatsu stated that this is not what the HRC is saying and Commissioner Brown called for this hearing. Vice-President Hood asked if the Department had gone all the way up in the HRC and talked to Virginia. Mr. Sanbonmatsu stated that he had and said that Supervisor Peskin had also sent a letter that was in front of the Commission today.

Director Chiu said that he thought that this item was going to be heard in front of the Human Rights Commission some time soon. Director Chiu said that he was contacted by a couple of the members of the Board of Supervisors who are in support of these programs continuing along with Steve Kawa of the Mayor's Office. President Fillon asked if the Commission could write a letter or asked what the Commission could do to get moving on this because it is hung up in limbo. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that it would be appropriate for Commission Brown who represents the tenant population to attend the meeting at HRC. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that if Commissioner Brown and some of the Board of Supervisors went to the meeting some of the people on the Human Rights Commission would be in favor of it.

Mr. Sanbonmatsu asked if Commissioner Brown could also help on the letter. President Fillon said that would be fine as he thought that was what Commissioner Brown wanted to do. President Fillon said that Commissioner Brown was supposed to come to the meeting so perhaps this item should be left open until he arrived. Mr. Sanbonmatsu said that Commissioner Brown could not show up before 3:30 p.m. and the meeting was moving fast and would probably be over. President Fillon suggested the BIC take action.

Vice-President Hood made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Santos , that the BIC ask Commissioner Brown to attend the hearing along with writing a letter expressing the opinion of the BIC that the contract should proceed based on the 80% minority participation and that this certainly meets the goals of the Human Rights Commission. Vice-President Hood added that having to farm it out to private owned firms would simply mean that the small amount of funding that the non-profits have would be further reduced. Vice-President Hood said that the Commission should encourage anyone else to also write letters supporting this.

The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 037-03

7. Update on the BIC Litigation Committee. [Commissioners Brown, Guinnane & Santos]

Commissioner Santos said that the meeting was last Monday and the representative of the City Attorney announced that there were a couple of large settlements that was allocated for DBI funds so in general it was a very upbeat meeting. Commissioner Santos said that some of the money that has been spent chasing the bad guys has been recovered. Commissioner Santos said the money was coming from violators who ignore the requirements of the Building Department by ignoring the Director's Hearing results and then realize that they have to settle with the City. Commissioner Santos stated that the City was quite successful in obtaining large amounts of money for this inaction. Commissioner Santos stated that a certain amount of the money goes to the City Attorney's Office for their efforts, but a substantial amount comes to the Department of Building Inspection. Commissioner Santos said that there were three cases that were settled last month and stated that there are other cases that are being tried right now and one particular case has gone into the penalty phase. Commissioner Santos said that this was the Jimmy Jen case and said that the penalty phase would determine the amount of money that will ultimately be obtained from that case.

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that the Litigation Committee meetings are Closed Door Sessions so specifics cannot be discussed, but one of the things that the Committee did discuss was that there was a very large Disabled Access case backlog. Mr. Hutchinson stated that this was discussed previously at the BIC about two or three months ago. Mr. Hutchinson said that the staff has done a great job in the last three months and have reduced the backlog, got on track with the State Attorney General and met all of the terms and conditions, everything that DBI needed to do. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department is looking at forwarding some of those cases to the City Attorney and those decisions will be made shortly, but the Department was able to clear up the backlog. Mr. Hutchinson said that part of the backlog resulted from an attorney by the name of Omholdtz, who would come to the Department and turn in twenty cases at one time and then come back two weeks later with forty more cases. Mr. Hutchinson stated that recently he received a call from Supervisor Dufty's office who asked if staff could attend a meeting in the Castro because apparently some of the merchants in the Castro have received notice from a new attorney as far as disabled access complaints and that there would probably be some sort of suit filed on behalf of some clients. Mr. Hutchinson said that it looks like a fairly large pool of business owners so he wanted to let the Commission know that the Department might be going down the same road with another attorney. Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department does not have the complaints yet, but it appears that they might be coming forth and it is a struggle for the Department when there is that sort of volume, that sort of workload, no matter how the Department relocates resources. Mr. Hutchinson said that potentially it is out there and the Department is just going to have to find a way to do it. Mr. Hutchinson stated that the Department might be coming back to the BIC reporting that there is a significant increase in the cases once again. Mr. Hutchinson thanked the Commission.

8. 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 22, 2003 from William Heijn with attachments to Director Frank Chiu regarding the Anjou Restaurant, 44 Campton Place and proposed alterations to this unreinforced masonry building.

b. Memorandum dated July 21, 2003 from Director Chiu to DBI employee Jul Parsons congratulating her on her appointment to the Mayor's Disability Council.

c. Letter dated July 24, 2003 From Kate Favetti, Executive Officer of the Civil Service Commission, City and County of San Francisco to Director Chiu regarding expediters and Director Chiu's response dated July 31, 2003.

d. Copy of letter dated July 21, 2003 from Ken Cleaveland, AAE, Director, Government and Public Affairs, BOMA San Francisco to Jack McNulty, Member, 2002-2003 Civil Grand Jury for the City and County of San Francisco regarding recommendations and response to San Francisco Civil Grand Jury Report of the Department of Building Inspection.

There was no public comment or comments from the Commissioners on the Communication Items.

9. Review and approval of the minutes of the July 2, 2003 meeting.

Vice-President Hood made a motion, seconded by Commissioner D'Anne that the minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 038-03

10. Review and approval of the minutes of the July 16, 2003 meeting.

Commissioner D'Anne made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Santos that the minutes be approved. The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC

11. 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.

President Fillon said that there was one item to be agendized, which was the adoption by the State of the NFPA Codes. Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to know the differences between the Uniform Building Code and the New Code and some sort of estimates on what the retraining of the staff was going to cost. Vice-President Hood said that she understood that the Fire Department has agreed to pay that, but there should be a budget for it. Vice-President Hood stated that she read an article in a magazine, an architectural magazine that says that the Fire Department stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars. President Fillon asked if Vice-President Hood could find a copy of the article, as he would like a copy of it. Vice-President Hood said that she was surprised that it was going to be such a good business.

President Fillon said that under the Director's report he would like a follow-up on the dispersal of the Grand Jury Report to let the Commission know where it went. Director Chiu said that he would copy the Mayor and Board of Supervisors. Vice-President Hood said that she also wanted the Department to request a copy of the distribution list from the Grand Jury. President Fillon said that Commissioner Hood's idea about getting to all of the people who got the original Grand Jury Report is a great idea because they need to get both sides of the story. Commissioner Santos said that a copy should also go to each of the Grand Jurors. Vice-President Hood said that she thought that it would be a good idea for the Department to send the response to each Grand Juror just to make sure that they don't get the summary. President Fillon said that he wished that Commissioner Guinnane were present because he would like his opinion on the response as he felt that the response focused on the Grand Jury Report itself and didn't talk about the process. President Fillon said that he did not know if the Commission wanted to get into that as a Commission or a Department, but said that there are definitely some problems with the process. Vice-President Hood said that perhaps the Commission and the Department should reply with this and then later, as a separate thing, the Commission could take up a critique of the Grand Jury process and involve more than just the criticism of DBI. Vice-President Hood stated that the reason for that would be that, in order not to look defensive, the Commission could draw on results from other Grand Jury Reports. President Fillon said that it was a separate thing totally because one is a required response.

12. 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.

13. Adjournment.

Commissioner Santos made a motion, seconded by Commissioner D'Anne that the meeting be adjourned. The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 039-03

The meeting was adjourned at 2:40 p.m.

_______________________
Ann Marie Aherne Commission Secretary