2.

President’s Announcements.

President Hirsch said he had no announcements except to thank Commissioner Hanrahan for sitting in his stead a few weeks ago, and running what he understood was a very smooth meeting.

3.

 

 

Acting Director Lee said she was not sure what the issue was, but said there was a question regarding DBI’s organizational chart that showed her overseeing the two Deputy Directors and there were questions of whether or not it existed.   Ms. Lee stated that for the past several years the Acting Director’s position was overseeing the two Deputy positions, and in the past in looking at the Organization Charts and the Annual Report for 2000, as well as the program description of the administration program which shows that the administration program was dedicated to providing support, overseeing the permit inspection programs and the other areas, etc.  Ms. Lee said she that wanted to let the Commission know it was not a single Organization Chart, but it was multi-year and it was published in the Annual Report as well as on DBI’s website.  Ms. Lee stated in the Commission packet there was a copy of two of the Deputies performance reviews and those showed that the Acting Director did sign and complete the reviews as the supervisor for the two programs.

 

       Commissioner Guinnane said Frank Chiu was the Director, Amy Lee was the Assistant Director, Jim Hutchinson was a Deputy Director, and William Wong was a Deputy Director.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Assistant Director Lee was saying the two Deputy Directors reported to her.  Ms. Lee said yes they reported directly to her up until 2003 when she thought the City did an MCCP reclassification of all the Deputies as well as the Directors’ position, and in order to classify the Director’s position, she thought that in category Director 3, it had to allow for other people to report to the Director, not just a single person which was then the Assistant Director.  Ms. Lee stated that the reporting got extended to having the Deputies not only report to her, but also directly to the Director himself.  Ms. Lee said that before that reclassification the Deputies just reported directly to her and she reported to the Director.

 

       President Hirsch called for public comment on item 3b. 

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said in his memory there was a totally different concept of the Organizational Chart. Mr. O’Donoghue said that he recalled the functions of the three Deputy Directors reporting directly to the Chief, which was Frank Chiu at the time.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that if the Commissioners looked at the functions underneath William Wong, Permit Processing, with Carolyn Tusch over the Central Permit Bureau they could see that these are highly technical divisions.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if these divisions reported to a non-technical person, which might be very true, but this action never came before the Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he would like research done to show when this draft was completed and became a reality, because there was no public input regarding this.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that William Wong should be at the meeting as well as Jim Hutchinson to testify as to what functions were reporting to whom and what was their understanding.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he believed this draft was done so that it could justify an increase in salary, but in looking at the actual functions these employees were not reporting to what is now the number two position.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that in order to justify a salary of $140,000 Amy Lee’s functions had to be enlarged.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that even the Housing Division came directly under Jim Hutchinson, so there needs to be a whole review and said he would suggest that this item be continued until William Wong could come to the meeting.         

 

       President Hirsch asked Acting Director Lee if there was any response.  Ms. Lee said the organization charts that she submitted are the published ones and said she thought that Mr. O’Donoghue was speaking about1995 when the Department was created with two deputies.  Ms. Lee stated that subsequently when the Director asked her to become the Assistant Director in order to help manage the two programs, the Charter mandated there was only supposed to be one Assistant Superintendent position and the Superintendent would oversee the two deputies.  President Hirsch said that he was not too familiar with how the Department was created way back then, but said that this was all historical now.  Ms. Lee said that she was giving historical information from 2000, when the Assistant Director position came to fruition, and said she had submitted annual reports that are not draft, but published annual reports.  President Hirsch asked if there were annual reports from 2001 through 2005 and Ms. Lee stated that she submitted reports for each year. 

 

Commissioner Guinnane asked Deputy Director Hutchinson to speak to this issue.   Commissioner Guinnane stated there were organizational charts going back to 2000-2001, 2002-2003, and so on and said he was trying to figure out who Mr. Hutchinson reported to, based on the way the chart was set up.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Hutchinson reported to the Assistant Director or to Director Frank Chiu when there were issues to discuss.  Mr. Hutchinson said he would mostly report to Director Chiu.  Mr. Hutchinson stated that the Department’s current organization chart is on DBI’s website and it shows the three programs a permit program, an inspection program, and administration program, so even though the titles and pay were different they were pretty much in line.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if when Mr. Hutchinson goes down the Chain of Command, which differs from what the Commission was shown, if he handled all of the inspections and permits.  Mr. Hutchinson said yes.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if the chiefs and seniors reported to Mr. Hutchinson and then he reported to Director Chiu. Mr. Hutchinson said that was correct.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if William Wong mainly handled the administrative side and if he reported directly to Director Chiu.  Mr. Hutchinson stated he would tend to say so, because on technical matters they would go to Director Chiu.  Mr. Hutchinson said that if Director Chiu were out of the office the Director would take turns appointing William Wong, Amy Lee or himself to fill in.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Wong or Mr. Hutchinson had the most contact with Director Chiu, and Mr. Hutchinson said it was pretty much Mr. Hutchinson’s program.  President Hirsch stated that is the way it was and now the Commission will see how it will be.

 

c.

Update on Bayview Hunter’s Point project regarding impact on DBI staff.

 

 

Acting Director Lee said that she was giving the Commission a status update for the Hunters Point Shipyard project and that the Department has done several inspections for about six buildings, and one peer review for a general upgrading plan for permit application that has not been submitted, but will be in a month.   Ms. Lee stated that she thought the Commission was concerned whether or not the Department was doing a lot of work with the Bayview Project, but that was not the case right now, but things would most likely pick up in another month or two.

 

Commissioner Guinnane asked what were the standards with the condition of approval on this project with the 16 employees that were building inspectors, engineers, plan checkers, and clerical staff.   Ms. Lee said the Department was given permission to hire temporary-exempt staff as needed because the process involved in getting a supplemental would be lengthy.  Ms. Lee stated that the Department is going to try to do both at the same time so that the people that are hired on a temporary-exempt requisition will be transitioned to a permanent one.  Ms. Lee said that the Department could start hiring tomorrow and reported that this past Friday interviews were held for the 6631 and she asked the panelists to select, on top of the existing five vacancies, another four positions for the temp-exempt.  Ms. Lee stated that unfortunately the applicant pool did not lend itself to be able to pick more people off of the list and said the Department is moving forward as quickly as possible.  Ms. Lee said that the Department is looking at options, not just temporary hiring and moving them to permanent or moving them directly to permanent hiring.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Ms. Lee if there were nine openings in this classification and Ms. Lee said there were five right now given the supplemental positions as well as four additional ones.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if this would make nine positions and Ms. Lee said yes.  Commissioner Guinnane stated he understood there were 57 applicants and asked what was the status on this.  Ms. Lee said the Department had interviews and she did not think all 57 were qualified to be interviewed.  Ms. Lee stated some of the applicants did not provide sufficient verification or the managers did not think they had the qualifications for the Department.  Ms. Lee said that staff held interviews all day Thursday and Friday and picked three or four people.  Ms. Lee stated that the Department was going to go through the application pool again and that a more extensive announcement should to out as well as notification to the ICBO  or other jurisdictions to post the Department’s vacancies.

 

Commissioner Guinnane asked out of the 57 applicants how many were actually qualified for the interview process.   Ms. Lee said she would let Cathy Abela who is the Department’s liaison officer speak to the question   Ms. Cathy Abela introduced herself as being from DHR (Department of Human Resources) and stated that she is the liaison to DBI.  Ms. Abela stated that 17 applicants were selected and invited to the interview, and three of those were no-shows.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if only 17 people qualified out of 57 applicants and Ms. Abela said 17 were selected to be interviewed.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if the rest of the applicants had issues such as not being qualified for paperwork or what were the issues.  Ms. Abela stated various managers reviewed the applications and human resource staff was given the 17 candidates to actually invite for the interviews themselves.  Acting Director Lee said the Department was trying to expedite the hiring so that once the project does come on line within the next month or two, the Department would be able to respond staffing wise.    

 

a.

Report on DBI’s multi-lingual service provisions.

 

Acting Director Lee said there were previous questions about multi-lingual access and the Department’s ability to provide some services in different languages.  Ms. Lee said that some of the new Commissioners might not be aware that there is currently a bilingual ordinance requiring that DBI’s postings are sent and posted in multiple languages, and that the Department has to maintain specific phone lines dedicated to different languages as well.  Ms. Lee stated that DBI is very fortunate because of the diversity of staff, and because of this DBI did not have to hire new people unlike some other departments.  Ms. Lee said that DBI has a lot of staff available to speak in many languages and the Department provides a special premium for staff that primarily speak a certain language.  Ms. Lee stated that most of the Department’s brochures are available in many different languages and said she would be happy to answer any of the Commissioners questions.

 

Commissioner Ting asked how would contractors, that do not primarily speak English, get assistance with their inspections or documentation from the Department.   Ms. Lee said that DBI normally has an inspector available in every language and if not, there may be cross inspections or a senior or chief would provide the information.  Commissioner Ting asked what would happen if there was perhaps a Chinese speaking contractor and a Spanish speaking inspector and Ms. Lee replied that there would be a reassignment so that the appropriate inspector would be present at future inspections.  Ms. Lee said that there is not a formal request process available, but the Department has been very open and responsive to this in the past.

 

4.

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

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue said he wanted to talk about the process being emasculated and that the Department’s perception is not subjective.   Mr. O’Donoghue stated there are rules and the City Attorney’s Office has issued a booklet some years ago, and he is surprised that the City Attorney has not distributed the booklet to the new Commissioners.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the booklet specifically states what is expected of Commissioners and how to engage when it comes to public comment.  Mr. O’Donoghue gave an example of the April 4^th hearing where Commissioner Hirsch indicated that all speakers would be limited to one minute of comment at the very beginning of the meeting prior to the main item, and said that this was totally out of order and it created rancor.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that President Hirsch should not have made that determination until the item was called on the agenda, and said that the City Attorney should have advised him of this.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that procedural matters could be complex unless someone is used to them.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that under Robert’s Rules of Order, after a public speaker comes up and gives public comment the Commissioners cannot then comment after that person has sat down on what he already commented on and that is standard policy throughout all departments, including the Board of Supervisors.

 

Mr. O’Donoghue said that basically there seems to be a different set of rules for one Commission than for another, and as a result of this Vice-President Hanrahan commented on two public speakers once they sat down and they had the right to comment on her comments, but that was not allowed.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Commission was not properly informed by the City Attorney present and gave a further example of improper procedure during the hearing, and said there is a whole disruption of standards so Buck Delventhal should to come to the BIC meeting to give advice on this.

 

5.

Discussion and possible action to release hiring freeze on Housing Inspectors. [Acting Director Amy Lee]

 

Acting Director Lee said that there are about four current vacancies in the 6270 Housing Inspector class, and there are two additional vacancies due to retirement.   Ms. Lee stated that there has been a lot of discussion the past couple of years about these positions and said she wanted to make sure the Department is responsive, yet she would like to come to some sort of a conclusion so the Department can address the Commission’s concerns.  Ms. Lee said she would like the Department to be allowed to move forward and fill those positions.

 

President Hirsch asked if Ms. Lee was saying that in order to undo the hiring freeze, she would require the Commission to give their consent and Ms. Lee said yes.   Ms. Lee stated that she believes there is some misunderstanding because she was informed that there was a release, but she asked the secretary to look back and it was determined that is was not officially released by the Commission, so she did not want to move forward with hiring contrary to the Commission’s wishes.  President Hirsch asked if Ms. Lee felt that this was a severe need.  Ms. Lee said the Department has not filled these positions since 2001, 2002 and said that the Housing Chief was present.  Ms. Lee stated that the Department recently implemented a lead ordinance that also requires Housing Inspectors and in addition there will be more staff either taking sick leave or will be taking a lot of time off so she did not want to detrimentally harm the housing inspection division.  President Hirsch asked if the Department was short on Building Inspectors and Ms. Lee said that the Department was trying to do aggressive hiring with the Building Inspectors.  Commissioner Ting asked if these positions were already budgeted for and Ms. Lee said yes they were.

 

Rosemary Bosque, Chief Housing Inspector said that when the Commission placed the freeze on the department on or about May of 2001, it did not address the core organization of the division.   Ms. Bosque reviewed the organizational chart and said that the freeze was directed at two additional positions, and not the positions that are in the current chart.  Ms. Bosque said that Commissioner Guinnane along with the Commission makeup at the time was very concerned about certain policy decisions being made by the Housing Chief, her predecessor.    Ms. Bosque went on to elaborate on the significant vacancies in the division and explained that it was essential that the Department hire more staff because the vacancies have severely impacted the services that the housing inspection division can achieve.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Ms. Bosque to explain what prompted the freeze in 2001.  Ms. Bosque said that her recollection was that the Commission at the time wanted to see a refocus of the individuals that were to be hired, and wanted the applicants to have more experience in the trades and construction.  Ms. Bosque stated that the Commission felt this was very important considering the types of responsibilities, and very specifically with respect to being able to identify problems with decks and things of that nature.  Ms. Bosque said that this was so significant that executive management asked her to change the Housing Code and add section 603 which addresses inspections and an affidavit process to be followed by building owners and industry professionals; this section assured that properties were maintained and that the owners would have other professionals look at the buildings in between the Department’s inspections.

 

President Hirsch asked if Ms. Bosque felt that the concerns of four years ago had been addressed successfully and Ms. Bosque replied that they would be addressed through the interview process and through the Civil Service process.   Commissioner Fillon asked Ms. Bosque what are the current minimum qualifications and she replied that they are listed within the package of Item 5.  Commissioner Fillon said that it was sort of general and Ms. Bosque said that it was her understanding that when you are looking at the actual job announcement and the minimum qualifications, the Department can look at that and prioritize those and evaluate them within the context of decisions as to who would be interviewed.  Commissioner Fillon asked if the description of the 6270 position had changed since what was listed before and Ms. Bosque said it was not her understanding that it was changed, however she said she did have a detailed job description that elaborates on those qualifications in the announcement.  Commissioner Fillon said that his concern was the same as it was before, that the applicants may be more like health inspectors and not familiar with construction issues related to buildings.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he was very instrumental in putting this into play because a lot of the individuals that were being hired came from the Public Health Department, and his concern was they had no outside experience.  Commissioner Guinnane said that there were problems occurring where decks collapsed, stairs were rotting, and people were getting hurt even though some of these buildings had been inspected by Housing Inspectors one year prior.

 

Commissioner Lee asked what the roles and responsibilities of the Housing Inspectors are.   Ms. Bosque said that the primary role is to implement and enforce the housing code, and that particular code has very broad reaching connotations with respect to the maintenance of existing residential structures, and those buildings that have been converted to residential use without permit.  Acting Director Lee said that she thought out of the past 17 or 19 hires the Department has had, two have indeed come from the Health Department.  Ms. Bosque stated that since the inception of the housing division, going back 15 or 20 years, the former chief of the division as well as at least one of the seniors came from the Health Department.  Ms. Bosque said that at one time the San Francisco Housing Code was part of the Health Code and there was some overlapping between the two with respect to sanitation and residential buildings.  Ms. Bosque reiterated that the previous Commission’s main concerns were of some of the prior hiring practices and that any new applicants would have experience in construction.

 

Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at the way the Department is set up, when the Housing Inspector goes out and cites a building for defective stairs or landings, the owner submits a permit and does the work.   Commissioner Guinnane stated that now you have a Housing Inspector who is going out looking at the permit and he has to bring a Building Inspector with him.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he believes the way it should be is if the Housing Inspector is able to cite the job, he should be qualified to sign off the job.  President Hirsch said that there are Building Inspectors so this would overlap if the Housing Inspectors took on these duties also. 

 

Ms. Bosque said that it was not necessarily that Housing Inspectors are not qualified, it was just that the work is divided in a way in which the Building Inspector gets the job card, and their main role is to go out and inspect that type of work for which a building permit is required.   Ms. Bosque stated that in the past Housing Inspectors did sign off on that type of work, but the responsibilities between the divisions changed over a period of time.  Ms. Bosque said that Commissioner Guinnane and the previous Commission had mentioned this issue before, but this existed because of a significant backlog and the inspections that the housing division was mandated to do by law; Chapter 3 of the Housing Code says that the Department is supposed to do routine inspections of the common areas of the R-3 occupancies.  Ms. Bosque stated that when she took over the division in September of 2001 there was a backlog of 7,000 buildings that is now reduced to over 5,000 and due to this situation executive management would not currently be in a position to switch over and add those responsibilities back to Housing Inspectors because there are not enough of them to do the mandated work. 

 

Commissioner Guinnane asked if it was possible to use both the list for Building Inspectors and that of Housing Inspectors to select candidates, for example could staff take some of the names off the Building Inspector list and put them in as Housing Inspectors.   Acting Director Lee said that the Department could not do that, but some applicants do apply for both jobs and would be considered for both.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if a person did not apply for both jobs by the end of the announcement period, if they could opt to jump over after the closing off period.  Ms. Cathy Abela said that the Building and Housing Inspector announcements were actually posted at the same time, so the candidate pools are very similar.  Ms. Abela stated there are many names that cross over from one pool to the other and they are being considered for both, but if the Department wanted to reopen the lists, then the Department could repost either one of the positions to get additional candidates.  Ms. Abela said that the Department could not interject without an announcement being posted because it had been closed, but certainly the Department could post a second announcement.  Ms. Lee said that this would be her recommendation because the Department obtained applications in January, so it would only be fair to continue to consider those people who applied then, but also post it open again so the Department could get a greater pool of applicants in about a week or two in order for the Department to move forward in the hiring.

 

Commissioner Guinnane asked if the salary was the same for Housing and Building Inspectors and Ms. Abela replied yes.   President Hirsch said that presumably those who want to be a Building Inspector want to be a Building Inspector, not a Housing Inspector, so they would sign for whatever list they were interested in.  Ms. Rosemary Bosque said that this was a very good point and that they are two entirely different disciplines in many ways.  Ms. Bosque stated that while a Housing Inspector could sign off on a building permit of a certain work in the confines of a Notice of Violation, there are a lot of things that a Housing Inspector does that is different such as dealing with property owners, tenants, tenants groups, et cetera, that requires mediation and other things that are entirely different than what a Building Inspector is accustomed to.

 

President Hirsch asked Acting Director Lee for how long a period did she want to reopen the list for, and Ms. Lee said two weeks would be sufficient so that she could be more extensive in the posting.   Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought two weeks was very short, and Ms. Lee said that the Department already posted the announcement in January for a long period of time and there were about 47 applicants.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if the Department would go back and notify all the applicants when the posting is done.  Ms. Cathy Abela said that there would be standard language on the announcements to say that for those who applied during the posting of the date in January, they need not reapply, but they will still be considered.  Ms. Abela stated that standard postings are two weeks, are usually distributed throughout the City, and are posted on the City’s web site. Ms. Abela said that additional recruitment is not precluded from that if the Department wanted to broaden the pool, and the Department of Human Resources could certainly send out announcements to whatever organizations the Commission would like.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if the Department could notify the applicants on the building inspection list that there are vacancies in the housing inspection division.  Ms. Abela said that D.H.R. could send an announcement to the group in their database.  President Hirsch called for public comment.

 

Mr. Randy Shaw, Director of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, said that it was good that the Commission was finally getting to this issue.   Mr. Shaw said that since the Commission was founded Commissioner Guinnane in particular has felt like there were too many people from health inspection and not enough people with construction experience, but it is a different job.  Mr. Shaw stated in fact the Chief Housing Inspector, Ms. Bosque, does not have construction experience but she has done an excellent job and obviously if the job required construction experience, she would not be the Chief Housing Inspector.  Mr. Shaw said it has been discussed that the biggest need in Housing Inspection is to have people with construction experience, but he feels there is a bigger need for bilingual people, particularly Spanish.  Mr. Shaw discussed that there is a bigger Latino population now, and stated that these tenants have branched out further than the Mission district.  Mr. Shaw stated that there are also more Asian tenants in areas that were not there before.  Mr. Shaw concluded that if the Department does not have people that can communicate with owners and tenants who often speak a different language than English then this is really a problem.  Mr. Shaw said that it is really imperative that the Department moves ahead with the hiring process because of the vacancies and the time it takes to hire new staff. 

 

Commissioner Ting said he wanted to echo Mr. Shaw’s point about the bilingual aspect again.    Commissioner Ting stated that his organization just finished doing a report on Asians in the state and in particular San Francisco, and found that over half the Asians are limited English speaking so that population has serious needs in terms of language and also in terms of being able to be communicated with.

 

Mr. David Herring introduced himself as a Housing Inspector and President of the Housing Inspectors Chapter, Local 21 and said that he felt very strongly that the hiring freeze should be lifted. Mr. Herring stated that the housing inspection division is short-staffed right now and when he started almost five years ago, there were 22 housing inspectors and now there are 17.   Mr. Herring said that two inspectors are retiring soon and that will put them at 15, which is a significant drop.  Mr. Herring stated that if the Commission is concerned about decks collapsing and rotting stairways falling down the Commission ought to make sure that more Inspectors get out to the properties.  Mr. Herring said that there is no way the current Inspectors can handle the 22,000 R1 buildings with two-thirds of the staff the Department had before.  Mr. Herring stated that it is a completely false claim that the housing inspection division has mostly Health Inspectors, because out of the last 18 or 19 hired only two were Health Inspectors. 

Mr. Herring said the Housing Inspectors mostly have a construction background, about 75%, and said he thought it was unfair to the Health Inspectors to say they are not qualified since they have to have a college degree, become Registered California Environmental Health Specialists, and so on.   Mr. Herring stated that Health Inspectors and Housing Inspectors have similar duties such as: inspecting buildings for code compliance, inspecting businesses such as laundries, massage parlors, restaurants, and single room occupancy hotels, writing notices of violation, and giving courtroom testimony. 

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that everyone recognizes that the functions of the Housing Inspector are totally different from that of a Building Inspector, but said that in years gone by Health Inspectors were being hired, but then that process was terminated.   Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the issue is that the examination qualifications in its present form discriminates against women of color, women from the black and Hispanic communities, and this is a reality that has never been changed.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it was ironic that the women’s groups that were present at the April 4^th and 18^th hearings were not present to advance the cause of women of color.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the fact that the requirements for the Housing Inspector are far lower than that of the Building Inspector; it should have been easy to bring entry-level women from those communities into this position.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA pushed for the integration of DBI and are still upset over the fact that the Department is discriminating against women of color.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that under the current system a woman from the minority community cannot qualify to take the Housing Inspector examination and said that the Department should set up another position or system to allow them to come in on a temporary basis to gain experience.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that without a qualified Building Inspector such as John Kerley working in the Housing division, the AIMCO Case would not have been settled. 

 

President Hirsch asked if Mr. O’Donoghue would care to point out where in this minimum qualification that it precludes the hiring of a minority woman of color.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that he knows a number of black women who have no experience whatsoever.  President Hirsch stated that he could point out a number of white women or men who have no experience.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the barriers exist by the announcement stating that the job requires two years of experience in housing and building inspection or enforcement and the person already has to be in this field, which they have been excluded from.  Mr. O’Donoghue asked how many black or Hispanic Housing Inspectors there were at DBI and Mr. Hirsh asked how many blacks there were in the RBA, and Mr. O’Donoghue stated that there are plenty.

 

Commissioner Ting asked Mr. O’Donoghue to clarify if he was saying that the Department should have a separate position that could allow people to get the experience and Mr. O’Donoghue said that was correct.   Acting Director Lee said of the current applicant pool that the Department received in January 11 were female, 43 were male, and that this was broken down in terms of ethnicity as well. Commissioner Ting asked if he could request a similar breakdown of the Department, including language ability.  Ms. Lee said she would prepare a report and mentioned that when she oversees some of the interviews she asks that all the female candidates get interviewed because of the fact there is a minority of them in the field. 

 

Ms. Abela said that she would like to clarify that the minimum qualifications, or changes in the duties of the job or additions, are usually changed within the permanent exam process and there is a very systematic process that is set up within the civil service process to make sure that the minimum qualifications are reflective of what is necessary to perform that job.

 

Mr. David Sassoon said he works for the U.S. Navy and works with democrats and republicans and the situation of Building Inspectors is very important.   Mr. Sassoon said that his mother, Jackie Sassoon, of Brooklyn, New York has been working with contractors for about 30 years in Brooklyn and New Jersey.  Mr. Sassoon stated that it is very important to choose an Inspector that is not insensitive or rude to people and does not just give orders.  Mr. Sassoon went on to mention topics such as Governor Schwarzenegger, the Thailand flood, and The Gap and Levi’s companies. Mr. Sassoon stated that these companies were irresponsible with their zoning and factories and concluded by saying that when the Department chooses a Building Inspector to keep the over sensitive people out of the running.

 

President Hirsch made a motion seconded by Commissioner Lee that the Commission go on record to release the hiring freeze as requested by the Acting Director.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 029-05.

6.

Discussion and possible action on report regarding DBI vehicles and maintenance costs. [Acting Director Amy Lee, Administration & Finance Manager Diane Lim]

 

Acting Director Lee said that there was concern about the high maintenance cost of vehicles and in the past two years, the Department replaced a significant amount of vehicles, so the amount of maintenance costs has been significantly reduced.   Ms. Lee said that the information before the Commission was categorized into two sections, one was the vehicle maintenance cost and one was bodywork.  Ms. Lee said that this was where most of the Department’s costs have been in terms of accidents, and most of the accidents have been other cars hitting the City cars.  Ms. Lee stated that in some instances the accident was a hit and run so that was where the significant costs of DBI vehicles were.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at the maintenance cost on bodywork, the Department pays out the money and asked if DBI is reimbursed.  Ms. Lee said that the Department was not reimbursed.  Commissioner Guinnane asked what happened if the car got in a collision that was not the employee’s fault.  Ms. Lee said that in those cases the insurance will handle it, but sometimes it is a hit and run.  Commissioner Guinnane asked what percentage of cars does DBI have that are not reimbursed.  Ms. Diane Lim said that as far as the vehicles that have been in accidents, this goes to litigation in the City Attorney’s office and the Department gets reimbursed based on the outcome of the research.  Ms. Lim stated that she did not have the breakdown of what percentage was reimbursed, but said she would get it.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he was not worried about the auto accidents at all, what he was concerned about was the actual maintenance of the car when it comes to brakes, transmissions, and engines because he knew that the Department had huge bills in the last couple of years and said he wanted to look at getting extended warranties. 

 

Ms. Lee stated that there is an extended warranty but what happens is the purchaser brings the car to the dealership not the Department.   Commissioner Guinnane said that he was not talking about the standard warranty that comes with the car that lasts either four years or 36,000 miles, but about an extended warranty plan for instance that costs $1,200 and covers up to 100,000 miles when the original warranty expires at 36,000.  Ms. Lee said that she spoke to Darrell at the Administrative Services Division who does all the centralized negotiations for the City, and was told that to the extent that the cost is reasonable Darrell has asked for extended warranties but in some vehicles it did not make sense because of the cost.  Ms. Lee stated that DBI could not do individual negotiations with the cars specifically; as the Department has to do this on a citywide basis.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to look at the actual vehicles the Department buys because there should be more of a demand for small pickup trucks like Ranger 100s, and said he thought there would be more resale value versus a car for parking in the yellow zone downtown.  Ms. Lim said that she would bring that information to the next Commission meeting.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like to get the actual cost of the truck, Ford Taurus car, and the cost on the extended warranty.  Ms. Lim stated that she wanted to give the Commission an update on the vehicles and said that in this year’s budget the oldest vehicle dates back to 1991 so the Department is slowly replacing all those vehicles.  Ms. Lim said that the Department just got ten vehicles in last week and was working on getting the additional thirteen within the next month.  Ms. Lim stated that DBI has asked for additional vehicles in next year’s budget to supply some of the Inspectors who are currently sharing vehicles or getting reimbursed for using their own cars or public transportation.  Ms. Lim said that the Department is requesting 26 vehicles for next year’s budget and are currently getting Honda Civic CMG’s and Toyota Prias, which help with fuel cost.  Ms. Lim stated that the Department’s fuel cost had gone down considerably since getting more fuel-efficient vehicles.  Commissioner Guinnane asked further questions about the cars, maintenance costs, and bills.  Ms. Lee and Ms. Lim responded by saying that the Department is trying to do a replacement policy with its cars, acknowledging that the Department needs to increase its fleet, and discussing the cars mileage, maintenance cost, etc.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he was concerned about the significant drop in the shop bill because in prior years the bills had been thousands of dollars, but the recent bill shows only about $1,500 for six months. Commissioner Ting said that he had the same concern as the report showed on $1,500 for repair, but $17,000 for collision.

 

Ms. Lim said that was the breakdown that was provided to the Department through Central Shops and according to the monthly records, this was the breakdown the Department was billed.   Ms. Lim stated that she would go back and call Central Shops and ask for more detail.  Ms. Lee said that she believed the bills were lower because the Department replaced 23 cars last year and Darrell at Central Shops also made some policy changes that resulted in improvements.  President Hirsch asked if bodywork done on the cars was covered by collision insurance and said the maintenance cost was only $1,550 for July through April, so he did not see warranties doing any good.  Ms. Lim said that she believed the Department has liability insurance, but this exceeded the amount of coverage in some cases.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he did not know who put the chart together, but the numbers do not reflect what the Department is paying because when he looked at the other numbers he was alarmed.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the previous bills reflected work on transmissions, cars coming out of the shop after spending $6,000, breaking down again and Inspectors getting a ride back so there is absolutely no way with all of these 90 cars that there was only $1,500 spent for in a six-month period. Ms. Lim said that the numbers were extracted from the Central Shops billing report, so she would call Administrative Services and get a more detailed report.  President Hirsh called for public comment.

 

Mr. David Sassoon said when his mother was living in war-torn Palestine-Israel holy land she was given a bus pass to move all over town and paint the lights black, so when the lost bombers from World War II needed to bomb some buildings they knew which ones they were.   Mr. Sassoon said that last week he was invited by the State Department of California to entertain a meeting concerning Mayor Newsom’s free pollution and his remarkable public transit system for stem cell research.  Mr. Sassoon said that the mass transit system was discussed at the meeting and he wanted to know if the Building Inspectors were too sensitive to take the bus and asked if they are allowed to use a bus pass like Mayor Newsom keeps pushing for.  Mr. Sassoon asked if there was any special provision against Inspectors using bus passes and President Hirsch said not that he knew of.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said in response to Commissioner Guinnane’s question, maybe what the Department has here is a bit of Enron accounting.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that if the issues and the actual repair bills came out in terms of what was spent it might be very embarrassing to the present administration, because it would demonstrate that using older vehicles makes no sense because the costs far exceed that of replacing them with new vehicles.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the building industry financed this whole operation and that is from WebCor down to the smallest contractor and when they financed it they were pretty liberal with their money.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the industry knew that with certain department sections being subsidized such as housing, it is absolutely disgraceful that given the amount of money the Department has and what was stolen from it that you have Inspectors sharing rides to do inspections.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that is the antithesis of good business because all it does is increase costs and service gets longer and longer in terms of being able to respond to requests for inspections.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that members of the industry have sued the City and the Department for $10 million in reimbursement and it is ironic that no union joined the industry in that lawsuit, even though the union’s members were being impacted by the Mayor stealing money from DBI.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that was supposed to be good fiscal responsibility and as a result of that Planning did not get any subsidies from DBI this year.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that politics are dictating what policies of this Department should be, not good, sound procedure from a fiscal perspective.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the industry is going to take another look at which programs were being subsidized, for instance, the Building Department is subsiding the Housing Department. 

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.

 

 

President Hirsch said that there was a letter entered from Doug Comstock of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force and asked if there was any comment.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that the Residential Builders Association were the ones who indirectly informed the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force of what they considered a totally illegal procedure.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he was glad the Task Force agreed with their position because they complained about the tape of the April 4^th and April 18^th hearings not being allowed on the Internet.  Mr. O’Donoghue said the RBA was shocked to hear that they had expunged out of the tapes matters that they considered not proper.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this is a total violation of the law and complete censorship, and said that he understood that some writers have been contacted by nationwide magazines about what is happening in San Francisco in terms of the Board and the complicity of the Commission in going along with that censorship.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if anything had set this country aside from other countries it is the right to speak and say things in public.  Mr. O’Donoghue mentioned that the Mayor had made some bad appointments to the Building Inspection Commission and the Police Commission, and in a sophisticated town like San Francisco there are going to be reactions and conflict.  Mr. O’Donoghue said the effect of the Mayor’s appointments was demonstrated arbitrarily and the gavel can come down and the sheriff be called on a woman who weighs no more than 95 pounds and the suppression of free speech goes on.

 

8.

Review Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.

President Hirsch said that he previously posed a question to Jim Hutchinson regarding plan checkers reviewing calculations, and there was an instance where hand calculations were done using a traditional, well accepted method and the structural engineer whom he knows, and a man who has 40 or 50 years experience, actually had the calculations which were perfectly o.k. and had the plans rejected by the plan checker saying he or she wanted a computer calculation done rather than hand calculations.  President Hirsch stated that if this was true he finds this unacceptable, and if he were the engineer submitting it, he certainly would have objected vehemently.  President Hirsch said that he would like a report on what the policy is.

 

Commissioner Guinnane said he wanted to discuss 3-R Reports and asked if somebody orders a 3-R report, and he understands the fees are around $60, when it is submitted to the Department, what is involved in getting a 3-R report and is it all on the computer.  Acting Director Lee said that she would agendize this item for the next meeting.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he understood it was taking 30 days to get a 3-R report and said that he wanted to look at that problem.  Commissioner Guinnane said he also wanted to explore the idea of completely eliminating the 3-R report in its entirety, because a lot of the information that is coming out of it is inaccurate.

 

Commissioner Guinnane said that he understood there were a lot of problems in the special inspection area and said that he heard that it takes three weeks for special inspection letters to get signed off when it used to take two days.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that at the last meeting he had several items to go on the calendar and only three were listed on the agenda.  Commissioner Guinnane said the other issue to discuss was the property at 323 – 26^th Avenue where the contractor basically demolished a whole house, and the Department held a hearing and it was ruled an unlawful demolition.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that this decision was appealed to the Board of Permit Appeals and the Department’s decision was reversed.  Commissioner Guinnane addressed City Attorney Judy Boyajian and said he read the e-mail stating that the Department cannot sue the Board of Permit Appeals, but said that the Director has the ability to forward something over.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in reviewing the hearing on this address, the law is the law and the Board of Permit Appeals has to uphold the law regardless of what the neighbors think.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he believed this case should be referred to the City Attorney’s Office and carefully looked at to file an action in court to reverse the Board of Permit Appeals.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the word on the street is with this case going through there is going to be a ton of the same cases and he also wanted a report on 838 – 46^th Avenue where one of the Commission’s former Commissioners is the Engineer of record on the property.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the Contractor brought in a machine and wrecked the house and there is only one wall left, so the way he sees it is the Department of Building Inspection will hold a hearing, it will be ruled an unlawful demolition, it will go over to the Board of Permit Appeals and be reversed.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that some other items he wanted to put on the agenda are:  Accountability in plan checking, engineering staff accountability, James Li Engineer drawings and the jobs that were approved by D.B.I. that have defective foundations, and to take action to notify those property owners.

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.

 

Commissioner Lee said some that time in the near future he would like to go over the communication with the public theme and what the Department does with the communication.   Commissioner Lee stated he knew that the Inspectors talk to contractors, landlords, and so on but said he was talking in general meaning what does the Department do for other people that do not interact with DBI every day.  Commissioner Lee said that he was looking for proactive communication as well as reactive, meaning reactive mode, and said he would like to know if the Department keeps statistics about what type of inquiries come in, how are they tracked, how they are routed through the Department, and lastly what type of bilingual services are offered.

 

Commissioner Guinnane said that another item he would like to put back on the calendar is the hiring of Building Inspectors.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he would like to discuss the issue of the 57 applications that were received and why only 17 were interviewed; what kind of process is in place with questions or interview panels, and also who is on that panel to see what the problems were so that they can be remedied in the future.

 

Commissioner Guinnane said that he would also like to address the car shop bills, and would like to go back and look at the cost for the last four years 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004 all the way up to the present year of 2005.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he knows the numbers for 2004 and 2005 are not correct and asked staff to provide them all at the next meeting. 

 

9.

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

 

President Hirsch called for public comment and asked Mr. Sassoon if he had a comment on the issues that the Commission had just raised.  Mr. David Sassoon addressed Commissioner Frank Lee and said with his work and detailing with the State department, the State department had asked him to question the issue of gardens.  Mr. Sassoon asked if someone knew, respectfully, what a garden in a big City like San Francisco should be and how it should be detailed for the pedestrians and the people with ADA on the street.  Mr. Sassoon asked if someone could make an inspection of the house, trees, and gardens if it were spilling over into the street, and also asked if that was part of the equation for hiring.  Mr. Sassoon stated that when applicants are considered is part of the inquiry or interview going to be about gardens or whether they understand the importance of trimming trees or the importance of the house that burned down on Haight Street because no one trimmed the tree.  Acting Director Amy Lee said no it is not.

President Hirsch said the next regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission would be on Monday, June 6, 2005 and the following meeting would be on Monday, June 20, 2005.  President Hirsch called for public comment.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that last Monday or Tuesday an action was taken by the Board of Supervisors that he considered a badge of honor to come under their invective, especially that of who he calls the angry dwarf.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was not against dwarfs or giants but said he was against angry big people and angry small people.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that his response was his declarative declaration of writing a poem, and he asked when did questioning ever in the history of any country become a crime.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was rather bemused by it and in anticipation of Mayor Newsom going to Ireland this year he had already contacted Bernadette Devlin in the North of Ireland and the University of Dublin and Galway and there was going to be a reading of his poem that is now banned in San Francisco.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he joined a long list of poets who had been banned in the United States in the ‘50s, in Boston in the ‘30s, and of course the McCarthy’s are now here.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it validates what he has said and when left wing ideologs have become more fascist than their right wing counterparts.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the action of the Board last week was absolutely shocking especially in this City where Jake McGoldrick has come down on Bush and his compatriots for doing what they have supposedly done illegally and this City does that which Bush would not have dare done, and had this happened during the Brown administration, he would have been caught, indicted, quartered and hung.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that there was a long list beginning with the alien sedition laws that were promulgated against immigrants and this shows that it is happening all over again in this day and age.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he is looking forward to the dialogue that is going to take place not just nationwide, but internationally and he said it was ironic that he started the boycott of Bush Mills here in the United States and they are going back to Belfast with an action that happened here for an action taken there.

 

10.

 Adjournment.

President Hirsch made a motion for adjournment, which was seconded by Commissioner Guinnane.  The motion carried unanimously.

                                                                                                       

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 030-05

 

The meeting was adjourned at 10:41 a.m.

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,



______________________

Sonya Harris

Assistant Secretary

 

Edited by

 

 

 

________________________
Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary