2.

President’s Announcements.

President Hirsch welcomed Commissioner Walker to the Commission and said that he looked forward to productive and fruitful collaborations.  President Hirsch offered congratulations to Amy Lee and her husband on the birth of their baby

 

3.

 

 

Commissioner Romero asked if the Commission would be voting on these items separately.   President Hirsch said that was correct and asked for Commissioner’s comments.  Commissioner Walker asked if there was a Committee that vetted these people and was this the recommendation of that Committee.  Commissioner Hirsch said that there was a Committee, but unfortunately the Committee consisted of Philip Ting whose seat Commissioner Walker now held and Commissioner Fillon who was unable to attend today’s meeting.  Commissioner Walker stated that she wanted to hear public testimony and said that she had received e-mails regarding one of the appointments and would ask that August Longo’s appointment be continued.   Commissioner Romero said that he would agree with Commissioner Walker as he had received a number of e-mails and phone calls.  Commissioner Romero said that he and Commissioner Walker had served with August Longo on the Democratic Central Committee and said that he did have some concerns when Mr. Longo’s name came up initially.  President Hirsch asked for public comment.

 

Mr. Michael Kwok said that he was currently serving under Mayor Newsom as a Taxi Commissioner and had previously served as the Mayor’s Disability Commissioner for four years from 2000 to 2004.   Mr. Kwok stated that he has been a long time advocate in San Francisco to improve transportation and public access.  Mr. Kwok said that he was a frequent visitor to the Access Appeals Board and served on the subcommittee of the Advisory Council for access.  Mr. Kwok said that he knew August Longo through a working relationship for perhaps ten years and was not going to say too much because he did not have anything positive to say.  Mr. Kwok stated that Mr. Longo came to San Francisco from the East Coast and said that he had been told that Mr. Longo had a history of credit fraud and might have been in a Federal jail; Mr. Kwok said possibly because he did not have any direct information and did not want to accuse someone.  Mr. Kwok referred to a letter from the Director of the Independent Living Resource Center warning the BIC about this particular appointment and said that he would urge the Commission to look into Mr. Longo’s record and to what type of person they would be appointing.              

 

Ms. Judith Christensen a Councilperson from the City of Daly City and a San Francisco schoolteacher spoke in favor of Mr. Longo’s appointment.  Ms. Christensen said that she knew Mr. Longo for four years and in every instance, both socially and from the work side; she had seen Mr. Longo as being a person to show extreme concern for others.  Ms. Christensen stated that everyone makes mistakes and if they are not allowed to grow and to become the people they are meant to be then what is the point of even being on this planet.  Ms. Christensen pointed out that Mr. Longo served as President of this very same Commission previously after he had the difficulties in New York.  Ms. Christensen said that Mr. Longo lives with the needs of the disabled every day and is very involved in the community.  Ms. Christensen said that Mr. Longo knows how to bring people together to make good decisions and to move forward with the work that needs to be done.  Ms. Christensen said that on a personal level, Mr. Longo’s character was above reproach. 

 

Ms. Geri Crowley said that she was a community activist who serves on the Democratic Central Committee and knew of Mr. Longo’s work with the disabled community on a statewide and local level.  Ms. Crowley stated that she would urge the BIC to continue this matter until the Commissioners questions had been answered.

 

Ms. Elizabeth Dunlap stated that she lives in San Francisco and was present to support the appointment of August Longo to the AAC.  Ms. Dunlap said that she worked closely with Mr. Longo on items with the Board in San Francisco and in Sacramento.  Ms. Dunlap stated that Mr. Longo has knowledge of the Disabled Community and the Building Codes.  Ms. Dunlap said that she was aware that people raised issues that happened over 20 years ago in Mr. Longo’s personal life and said that as an advocate for the disabled she believed that these events had little bearing on what was happening today.  Ms. Dunlap urged the Commissioners to appoint Mr. Longo to the AAC. 

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he had had his differences with August Longo in the past and said he was not surprised that political subjectivity would be advanced today to object to a proposal for him being elected.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that there are muck savages in this City and said that he was one of them because the process makes someone become a muck savage.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if you differ with someone on a political issue you become an enemy and get different names attributed to you.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he was not surprised at Debra Walker’s accusations coming from the background that she does.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he had recently savaged Debra Walker with a poem call the Magpie Walker.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this issue should have been taken care of in the Committee and said that it was important that the Committee members be present; for that reason he would support a continuance.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that in his country’s history men were declared terrorists and were sent out to be hanged or shot in Australia, but they escaped from Australia and then became Governors and Generals in the United States.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that Mr. Longo has been a very good activist in this City and said that even though he had had differences with Mr. Longo, Mr. Longo does his job diligently.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if you cross people in this City or some organizations then you are dead forever.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he would hope that the Commissioners knowing that everything is advanced through the political agenda would look at this objectively.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that Mr. Longo understands the needs of the disabled and said that he would support the continuance. 

 

Mr. David Chiu said that he was Chair of the 13^th Assembly District in San Francisco.  Mr. Chiu said that San Francisco is a City where personal grudges and personal politics often get in the way of good public policy and in the way of good people being able to move forward and help in this City.  Mr. Chiu stated that Mr. Longo was a very effective bridge-builder of folks from different communities in bringing them together to work for common causes.  Mr. Chiu said that unfortunately today because of some personal issues, Mr. Longo might be stymied and said that he would support a continuance.

 

President Hirsch said that he would take each individual and propose appointment or reappointment on each person.

 

Commissioner Walker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to reappoint Ms. Enid Lim.  The motion carried unanimously. 

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 041-05

 

Commissioner Walker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to reappoint Ms. Roslyn Baltimore.  The motion carried unanimously. 

 

 

Commissioner Walker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero, to reappoint Ms. Alyce Brown.  The motion carried unanimously. 

 

 

Commissioner Lee asked for discussion regarding the appointment of Mr. August Longo.  Commissioner Lee stated that the disabled community has grown over the years and said that it was good that the Commission was hearing these opposing sides, but said that he believed that Commissioner Fillon and former Commissioner Ting did their due diligence in selecting Mr. Longo.  Commissioner Lee stated that if the other Commissioners wanted to continue this item he would support that, but said that he was also ready to appoint. 

 

President Hirsch said that unfortunately Commissioner Fillon was not present and Commissioner Ting is no longer on the Commission so he would like a full airing of accusations that were made regarding issues in San Francisco and not some twenty years ago so he would support a continuance of this item.  

 

Commissioner Romero said that this was difficult because it was not easy for folks to come up and actually volunteer for these positions.  Commissioner Romero stated that these seats were similar to the appointing of the BIC Commissioners and no one is supposed to be making money off of these seats, but that is not always the case.  Commissioner Romero stated that this was the Access Disability Community and enforcing the access code and some of the concerns he heard was that those might be compromised.  Commissioner Romero said that he had called Commissioner Ting to ask the Commissioner if he was aware of the issues that had come up regarding Mr. Longo and Commissioner Ting said that he was not.  Commissioner Romero said that there was not a lot of full disclosure about some of the issues that had been raised that did not occur 20 years ago, but seemed to be a pattern and said that he was concerned about the Access Code being compromised.

 

Commissioner Walker said that she would agree with Commissioner Romero and said that she worked with Mr. Longo for many years and had nothing but good experience in doing that.  Commissioner Walker stated that she received information at the last minute and appreciated the opportunity to hear from both sides of the community on this issue.  Commissioner Walker said that Mr. Longo and the Commission deserved a full look into these allegations to serve the disability community well.  Commissioner Walker said that she did not think that the Commission had enough information to move forward with this appointment today.

 

President Hirsch said that he would request that Commissioner Fillon and Ex-Commissioner Ting be present at the next meeting to communicate with the Commission what their findings were and on what they based their recommendation.  President Hirsch said that he had not received any information or heard any information today that would compromise Mr. Longo’s candidacy and asked that if anyone had any real information to forward it to him because at this point it was all innuendo.  President Hirsch said that this is why he thought a continuance would be good and said that he was not going to base his decision on newspaper articles

 

Commissioner Hanrahan said that she thought that the Commission had received e-mails and newspaper articles regarding this issue, but said that the Commissioners should take it upon themselves to find out if that information is true. 

 

Commissioner Walker made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Romero, that the appointment of Mr. Longo be continued until the next meeting and until more information could be obtained.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 043-05

 

President Hirsch apologized to Mr. Longo for the delay.

 

Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Lee to appoint Mr. Arnie Lerner to the Access Appeals Commission for the seat of member experience in construction.   The motion carried unanimously. 

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 044-05

 

President Hirsch administered the oath to those members who were reappointed and appointed to the Access Appeals Commission and congratulated them.

4.

Director’s Report. [Acting Director Amy Lee]

President Hirsch said that since Amy was not present Mr. Wing Lau would do the Director’s report.   Mr. Lau stated that he was present as the Acting Deputy Director for Permit Services and said that Amy had asked him to sit in for her.  Mr. Lau said that he would do his best, but since this was a last minute call for him he might have to talk to Jim Hutchinson and get back to any questions the Commission might have. 

 

Mr. Lau said that before he reported on the update for 2508 – 19^th Avenue he wanted to make a correction to the record where he mentioned at the last meeting that there might be a settlement of up to two inches, but in fact the reality for the settlement has been insignificant.  Mr. Lau stated that there was a structural engineering report on this site that stated that the settlement was insignificant.  President Hirsch asked if Mr. Lau’s statement was a correction of a few inches of settlement.  Mr. Lau said that was correct and said that the report showed the settlement to be only 1/8 to 1/16 of an inch.  Mr. Lau said that the project sponsor submitted an application for underpinning on July 22^nd that was issued on July 26^th and was in the process of selecting bids from two contractors who are capable of doing the underpinning and getting this issue resolved as soon as possible.  Mr. Lau stated that this was the latest status at this point. 

 

President Hirsch said that the proposal was now to underpin the house on the corner.   Mr. Lau said that it was the house located at 1745 Ulloa Street.  President Hirsch thanked Mr. Lau for his report.

b.  Update on 21 Castenada.

Mr. Lau said that the next item he wanted to update the Commission on was 21 Castenada.   Mr. Lau said the Department is still dealing with the issue of the Stop Work Order at this point and said that the Stop Work order was still in effect and that the Department had only allowed the project sponsor to finish the outside painting to remove the scaffolding.  Mr. Lau stated that the issue with this property is the story count and that the building is longer and higher than what was originally proposed.  Mr. Lau said that this site had been inspected by both the Building Inspection Division and the Plan Check Division and the Department has sent out two letters to the owner.  Mr. Lau stated that Chief Building Inspector Carla Johnson had sent out a letter listing all the requirements, which required the owner to submit a revised plan as well as documentation for changing the slope.  Mr. Lau said that the Department had also asked for proof that the building was built according to the approved plan or whether there was any deviation from the actual site compared to a survey.  Mr. Lau said that to date the Department has not received anything from the project sponsor, Michael Tsang and until those documents are turned in for review the Department cannot determine what the next step would be.

 

President Hirsch asked if the survey was to determine if this is a five-story building because of the configuration with the sections that are cut.   Mr. Lau said that was correct and said that a survey was the key element to determine whether a story was added or whether the space could be counted as a mezzanine. 

 

President Hirsch said that there should be public comment on each item and asked if there was any public comment on item #4a.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue said that it has become more prevalent recently that on the Director’s report the public are not given advance copies of those reports and said that he understood that sometimes the reports are prepared at the last minute.   Mr. O’Donoghue stated that on item 4a there was no advance copy to the public so the public was at a clear disadvantage and requested that for future meetings the public have advance notice of these items.  Mr. Lau stated that there was no written report prepared and he was just reading from his report that was given to Acting Director Lee.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was glad to hear that the subsidence was less than what was testified to at the last Commission hearing, but said that to just do backup with soil is not a solution and that is why this issue was brought forward.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that these properties would have been in trouble had there been an earthquake and said that he was bringing this forward because there are going to be problems such as this in the future.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department should have a rapid deployment force to address this issue because there are scofflaw perpetrators out there and it will take just one accident and the reputation of everyone else would be maligned after that. 

 

Mr. George Tsang said that he wanted to speak on 21 Castenada and said that it might take a little more than the three minutes he would be allotted.   President Hirsch said that three minutes was three minutes.  Mr. Tsang handed out documentation to the Commission.  Mr. Tsang stated that he was a former Building Inspection Commissioner and a civil engineer and said that he had the unpleasant task now of discussing what seemed to be favoritism at DBI concerning the developments at 11 and 15 Castenada.  Mr. Tsang said that some individual at DBI made unfair and unfound accusations concerning the project he and his son were sponsoring.  Mr. Tsang said that as a result his son was protesting the inaccuracy of the building plan by the developers of 7, 11 and 15 Castenada. Mr. Tsang said that he believed the developers to be Mr. Chiu, Mr. Lai, Mr. Kong and Jimmy Jen.  Mr. Tsang said that the plans submitted by Jimmy Jen show a four story building on a gently sloping hill that was actually much steeper than what was portrayed.  Mr. Tsang said that after discussing this with the Plan Checker who refused to acknowledge the inaccuracy of the plans and the incomplete survey drawing he spoke to Mr. William Wong who was then the Deputy Director of DBI.  Mr. Tsang stated that Mr. Wong agreed with him and required the plan to be shown at the correct elevation and at that time Jimmy Jen changed his plan.  Mr. Tsang said that last year the plans were submitted for 11 and 15 Castenada again showing the inaccuracy and said that this is the reason why he thought there was unjustified attacks on 21 Castenada.  Mr. Tsang stated that his son had filed a discretionary review with the Planning Department on August 18, 2004. 

 

Mr. Tsang said that he found out that 9 days later a new District Inspector filed a Notice of Violation on 15 Castenada for construction work being done on an expired permit and for work beyond the scope of the permit.   Mr. Tsang stated that 15 Castenada is a vacant lot and said that he thought that the District Inspector probably intended to cite 21 Castenada and said that the Notice was filed by visual observation from the street and not from the interior.  Mr. Tsang said that on December 5, 2004 the District Inspector and a Senior Inspector went to 21 Castenada to take measurements inside and outside the building.  Mr. Tsang said that the District Inspector behaved very rudely and made unfair and unfound accusations regarding this building.  Mr. Tsang said that on December 15, 2004 the same Senior Building Inspector and a BIC Commissioner went to 21 Castenada and tried very diligently to look for anything wrong.  Mr. Tsang said that the next day an anonymous complaint was lodged against 21 Castenada. 

 

President Hirsch asked for any other public comment on item #4b.   Vice-President Hanrahan said if there was no other public comment she thought that Mr. Tsang should be allowed to continue, as she would appreciate more information on this matter.  President Hirsch said that he would agree except that thus far he had not heard anything about 21 Castenada and had only heard complaints about 7 and 11 or whatever.  Vice-President Hanrahan said that she would not mind hearing a Reader’s Digest version of this situation.  President Hirsch said that he would agree but wanted to hear about 21 Castenada and not allegations about other projects that may or may not have gotten permits or passed over.  President Hirsch said that the Commission would allow a few more minutes, but urged Mr. Tsang to speak only about 21 Castenada.  Vice-President Hanrahan asked Mr. Tsang what his relationship to the project was.  Mr. Tsang said that he was the father of the owner. 

 

Commissioner Walker asked how much extra time was going to be allowed.   Vice-President Hanrahan said that she would like to allow ten minutes.  Commissioner Romero said that this was too much time and President Hirsch said that he would allow an extra three minutes. 

 

Mr. Tsang continued saying that an anonymous complaint was lodged against 21 Castenada supposedly for work without a permit and for an unsafe building.   Mr. Tsang stated that the same day that the Notice of Violation was issued questioning the number of stories and a separate accessory building being built above a retaining wall.  Mr. Tsang said that he found it difficult to believe that a DBI Commissioner went out to inspect this building based on an anonymous complaint.  Mr. Tsang said that during his many years as a Building Inspector if there is a question in Code interpretations, such as that with 21 Castenada, the District Inspector would ask for the original Plan Checker and maybe issue a correction to the Notice of Violation.

Mr. Tsang stated that on April 11, 2005, two Plan Checkers, two Senior Building Inspectors and a Chief Building Inspector went to 21 Castenada; some of them had hostile attitudes and tried to find something wrong beyond the scope of the anonymous complaint. 

 

Mr. Tsang stated that on June 9, 2005, the new DBI Director sent four DBI personnel to 21 Castenada for an independent inspection and they came with helpful and professional attitudes.   Mr. Tsang said that by now 14 various personnel from DBI have seen 21 Castenada which is very unusual for a single family house.  Mr. Tsang said that he was currently working with DBI to resolve the issues at 21 Castenada. 

 

Mr. Tsang said that his son had sent a letter dated June 1, 2005 to complain about the inaccuracies of 11 Castenada and had not received any response after two months.   Mr. Tsang said that 21 Castenada received quick attention after an anonymous complaint.  Mr. Tsang said that he was concerned about some unfound accusations about his son’s integrity that had been circulating among some DBI Managers and said that the truth could be readily attained from the former Director.  Mr. Tsang said that so many Managers had been sent to 21 Castenada that he was now requesting a competent, independent, impartial Plan Checker such as Dennis Dang who checks these plans everyday to give his opinion on the story count.  Mr. Tsang stated that his Lawyer, Joe Bravo had written a letter opposing this thing. 

 

President Hirsch thanked Mr. Tsang and said that this issue was under review by the Department and hoped that there would be a determination soon.

c.  Report on the status of DBI’s response to the Grand Jury Continuity Report.

Mr. Wing Lau said that included in the Commissioners’ package was a matrix, which addressed the five issues listed on the Grand Jury Continuity Report.   Mr. Lau said that there was already some progress made by the Department on upgrading the PDF system and the Department had selected a new vendor to do an assessment to incorporate items such as bar coding into the system.  Mr. Lau said that with the quality control there is still a backlog, but the delay is due to a shortage of staff.  Mr. Lau stated that he was not familiar with the report and would get back to Commission if there were any questions.

 

President Hirsch asked if the Department was ready to send a response to the Grand Jury.   Mr. Lau said that he would discuss the issue with Acting Director Lee to determine when the report is complete.  President Hirsch announced that the Department had 60 days to answer the report. 

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue said that DBI had poured millions of dollars into the computer system and was throwing good money after bad because the more money that is spent the worse the system seems to get.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that there is something really broken here because money has never been the issue and the problem still is not solved.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the system was recently down for a week and a half and it was not a citywide problem as was reported by the Acting Director, but it was just a few departments.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that DBI has to have an independent computer system and said that DBI should bring someone in from the outside that understands the Department’s needs.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that when the computer is broken down everything comes to a stop.  Mr. O’Donoghue suggested that the Commission form a Committee to address this issue.

 

President Hirsch asked Mr. Lau who was in charge of the computers at DBI.   Mr. Lau answered that it was Acting Director Lee and Steve Young.  President Hirsch asked Mr. Lau to have Steve Young call him to discuss what the problems are and what could be done to alleviate them.  Commissioner Walker asked that this item be agendized for a future meeting.

 

President Hirsch said that he fully agreed with Mr. O’Donoghue because in this day and age to have a computer program crash is just not acceptable especially for a week and a half. 

 

   Commissioner Romero said that Local 21 was affected also and its computer system was inundated with viruses.  Commissioner Romero said that one of the problems is that I.T. planning usually takes place at the end of a project rather then being planned for in the beginning. Commissioner Romero said that there are many different types of programming in the City and different types of systems even with the e-mail systems there is not just one in the City, but many. 

 

Commissioner Walker said that ever since she had been involved with the BIC the computer system has been problematic and said that there had been two or three attempts to create a system that works for everybody, the public as well as the contracting community and the employees.   Commissioner Walker said that it would be good to agendize this and have a full vetting of it.

d.  Report on the Draft Client/Expediter Code of Professional Conduct.

Mr. Wing Lau reported that on July 18^th Amy sent out a memo including the proposed Client/

Expediter Code of Professional Conduct for everybody to review.   Mr. Lau asked that all of the Commissioners review this document and send comments to the Department so that a final document could be displayed.  President Hirsch said that the document certainly had good intentions, but said it would be the implementation of it and the following of it by the personnel that would count.

 

Commissioner Walker asked if the Expediter community had been involved in this issue.   Mr. Lau stated that the Department had sent this document to the Public Advisory Committee for review.

 

Commissioner Lee asked how many members were in the Expediter community.   Mr. Lau said that he was not sure, but thought that there were perhaps ten.  President Hirsch asked if the Expediters were registered.  Mr. Lau said that they were not registered. 

 

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that to impose this Professional Code of Conduct on clients and expediters is kind of a fatwa.   Mr. Karnilowitz said that he was a frequent visitor to DBI and said that a lot of time is wasted by people who do not know what they need so they spend a lot of time with the Plan Checker.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that if these people do not have their documentation together they should be told to get it together and then come back.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that the Department is supposed to come out with a checklist to present to the Plan Checkers so the Plan Checkers could at least give this to the clients so there is no waiting around for hours.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that he thought there should be a time limit on help from the Plan Checkers as it holds everyone up.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that he knew of at least 20 Expediters working in the City and said that there is not any requirement for registration.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that Expediters do an excellent job and really help out DBI because the Expediters bring full documentation and do not argue with the Plan Checkers.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that he thought that employees at DBI would have a lot of support for Expediters.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he knew some Expediters and did not particularly like them, but the fact is that they do a service.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that if 98% of all permits are processed and expedited within 30 days then only 2% of the permits are being handled by Expediters.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Expediters are used by downtown firms, which is necessary because there is serious remodeling like a major redo of an office building that would require an Expediter.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that many Architects when they come out of college are not familiar with the Codes so the smart firm will hire an Expediter whose specialty is knowing what is in the Code.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that a CEO of a large firm or a project sponsor would not be submitting permits, but said that he thought there was a need to differentiate between Plan Facilitators and Expeditors because the Facilitator applies for the permit and follows that process through.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Expediters themselves follow a permit through the system and check to see where the plan is.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this is a necessary function of the business and the question that should be asked if has someone been harmed by this process or these people and the answer is clearly no.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that unlike before this Commission was created most of the permits are coming through in a very expeditious form and said that the best Expediter was the Department itself.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that most people have their permits out within 24 or 48 hours and said that the system is working.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Chronicle decided to go off on a rampage and malign the Department so it used this issue of Expediters as if they were criminals and then there was a hearing at the Board of Supervisors and there was not one infraction or negative case found over there.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that then the Chronicle said that there was undue treatment in the Department and again there was not one single case to demonstrate that.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Chronicle was just doing hocus-pocus for headlines and selling newspapers.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that there does need to be a Professional Code of Conduct, but everyone needs to look at the context in which it is being framed.

 

President Hirsch asked how this would be disseminated to Expediters since they are not registered and the Department does not know how many exist.   Mr. Lau said that the Code of Conduct would be posted throughout the building and given out when permits are issued.  Commissioner Lee asked if there was anywhere on the permit application that lists if a person is a consultant or an Expediter.  Commissioner Walker said that the application only asks for a contact name and that could be the Expediter or the Architect or Engineer. 

 

5.

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

 

Mr. George Tsang said that his son had sent two letters to the Building Department; one dated June 1^st concerning 11 Castenada and the other letter written by his attorney Mr. Bravo.  Mr. Tsang stated that he was very concerned about the project at 11 Castenada because there is a 12-foot retaining wall being built which exceeds the scope of the permit.  Mr. Tsang said that this is on a very steep slope, but on the building permit it was portrayed as a gentle slope and said that he observed concrete being poured with no inspections and piers being drilled with no inspection.  Mr. Tsang said that to date his son’s letters have not been answered and no action has taken place. Mr. Tsang stated that this was the first time he heard about 21 Castenada being on the agenda otherwise he would have been before the Commission earlier.  Mr. Tsang asked to be notified in the future if addresses on Castenada were going to be discussed.  Mr. Tsang asked that Mr. Lau answer his son’s letters as soon as possible. 

 

President Hirsch said that he believed that drilled piers require a special inspection. 

 

Mr. Lau said that he did receive a copy of these letters, but did not mention them because this is not part of the agenda.  Mr. Lau stated that when the Department received a complaint from the Attorney, the Department issued a Stop Work Order for this project.  Mr. Lau said that today the Senior Building Inspector and a Senior Engineer were going to the site to do an inspection to see what happened and to determine whether the property is in compliance with the approved plan.  Mr. Lau said that with the inspections it is up to the project sponsor to contact the Department to set up the inspection. 

 

President Hirsch said that he believed that drilled piers, if that is what is involved here, require a special inspection report.  Mr. Lau said that this project would require a special inspector.  President Hirsch said that this inspection would be done by an independent engineer or inspector hired by the owner.  Mr. Lau said that was correct, but said that the Department would still be called to do a random inspection on that.  Commissioner Walker asked for an update on this item for the next meeting. 

 

Mr. Henry Karnilowitz said that he wanted to apologize for breaking into the conversation dialogue between Commissioner Guinnane and Acting Director Amy Lee at the last meeting.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that he did not intend to upstage anyone, but said that from where he sits he does see a lot of things that people within the Department do not see.  Mr. Karnilowitz stated that Commissioner Lee had asked about showing Permit Expediters on the application and said that there is a place for an Expediter to be listed.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that there is a separate form for that.  Mr. Karnilowitz asked the Commission to give the public a chance to say what they see from the customer’s point of view. 

 

Mr. Karnilowitz said that he wanted to commend Inspector Ron Tom for coming up with a great idea to expedite the renewing of permits so that the customer will no longer have to wait to pull a number to get permits renewed.  Mr. Karnilowitz said that he did not know when this was going to be implemented, but said that hopefully this would speed up some of the process.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he wanted to talk about interviewing and vetting.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that a double standard existed in the system because when this Commission was created it was unique because there was a selection done by the Mayor of four appointees and three by the Board of Supervisors.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that subsequent to that the Board of Supervisors began to do the same thing except the Board went one step further and brought in an interviewing process.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that when the Board brought in the interviewing process of the various nominees they were absolutely hypocritical in the manner in which they did it and it was unfair.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that for the appointees on the Board of Permit Appeals when the Mayor puts his nominees forward they are interviewed by the Board of Supervisors, but when the Board puts their nominees forward no one interviews them.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the public is the loser on this issue.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Board of Supervisors took a process that was very fair and then changed the rules so that process is now unfair.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the BIC had the opportunity to interview Mr. Longo today and said that he would propose a ballot issue that the persons nominated for appointment to the Building Inspection Commission also be interviewed at both a public hearing and the Board of Supervisors.

 

At this point President Hirsch asked Vice-President Hanrahan to chair the meeting for a few moments.

 

6.

Update on the status of the referral to the City Attorney’s Office regarding 323 – 26^th Avenue. [Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian]

Deputy City Attorney Judy Boyajian said that there was a letter that was still under review by the City Attorney and said she expected a letter to come out sometime next week.

 

Vice-President Hanrahan said that this would be continued for another meeting.

7.

Update from the BIC Director Search Committee.  [Commissioners Guinnane, Lee & Romero]

Commissioner Romero said that he and Commissioners Guinnane and Lee had met last week to review a calendar set forth by Commissioner Guinnane to follow a process by which resumes would be collected, get reviewed and then a final determination made hopefully by the end of November.   Commissioner Romero stated that the Committee was looking at a process that would engage a headhunter and follow somewhat of a similar process as happened at the Planning Commission.  Commissioner Romero said that he also asked that the BIC be able to look at some of the resumes that were submitted to the Planning Commission because in some jurisdictions the Building Inspection and Planning Department are one and the same.  Commissioner Romero said that the Committee discussed asking Secretary Aherne to review the resumes to eliminate the ones that would not meet the criteria for the job.  Commissioner Romero said that the Committee wanted to open the process for collection of resumes beginning September 15^th and close the process by October 31^st in order to be able to make a final determination by November 7^th.  Commissioner Romero said that the Committee was hoping to have candidates at the November 7, 2005 meeting.  Vice-President Hanrahan asked for questions from the other Commissioners.

 

Vice-President Hanrahan asked about the head hunting firm and how that worked.  Commissioner Romero said that one of the discussions had to do with the way that the City actually does purchasing in terms of contracting services so the Commission is going to have to use one of the City’s contracting services, but at this point it has not been determined which firm would be used. Secretary Aherne said that she called Purchasing and received a list of approximately 35 names, but none of them were designated as being cleared to work with City departments and said that she would have to research this issue.  Secretary Aherne said that it appeared that the list she received were companies that were asked to respond to an RFP, but there was no indication as to who applied or who was selected.  Commissioner Romero stated that it might be helpful to see what Planning did in terms of hiring a headhunter.  Secretary Aherne said that Planning did not use a headhunter and said that she did ask Planning for the resumes. 

 

President Hirsch returned to the meeting.

 

Commissioner Lee said that he wanted to clarify that the headhunter is going to help look for the candidates, but said that the Committee was not advocating that the headhunter would help select the new Director as the Commission could interview and select someone that is qualified and correct for this Department.  Commissioner Lee stated that he wanted a headhunter to go out and find qualified candidates and persuade them to go through the process.

 

President Hirsch asked what the timeline was on this process and apologized for missing that portion of the meeting.  Commissioner Walker said that September 15^th is when the Commission would start accepting resumes; October 31^st is the deadline for deciding and then the candidates would be presented at the November 7, 2005 meeting.  Commissioner Lee said that October 31^st was the date for closing the resumes.  Commissioner Romero said that then the Commission would meet on November 7^th to discuss the candidates.  Secretary Aherne said that the Committee had actually recommended interviewing candidates at the November 7^th meeting in Closed Session.  Secretary Aherne said that the job posting would be on several websites so the search would be widespread.  President Hirsch thanked the Secretary for her work.

 

President Hirsch said that he was informed that there was no public comment called for on Item #6.  No member of the public had any comments; the President called for public comment on Item #7.

 

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue said that there was the usual four month delay and said that the Committee hearing was very informative in that various viewpoints were put forward that again led to the conclusion of a parallel process taking place.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the process finally got underway with the headhunter not being an obstructionist, but would be working in conjunction with the Committee in trying to induce more candidates.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it was important to bring stability into the Department as there is a great deal of unrest right now, a great deal of dissatisfaction, a great deal of uncertainty because any time there are temporary positions at the head then there are all sorts of morale problems.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it was very important from a morale perception that the Commission move rapidly forward in this instance and very important to look at the qualifications and those standards need to be published because there is special training required and there is compliance with State law.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this was an important issue, the qualification, so that a debate about the qualifications does not come in at the last minute.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the public needs to get a chance to vet at the very beginning so that all those who apply understand what the qualifications are. 

 

Vice-President Hanrahan said that she thought Mr. O’Donoghue made a very good point because the Commission does need to have an understanding of what the job qualifications are.  Vice-President Hanrahan said that she understood that the qualifications were modified to qualify the last Director so it would be good for the Commission to have the job description and the necessary qualifications.  President Hirsch mentioned the CBO requirement and Commissioner Walker said that perhaps this issue could be put on the next agenda to have a presentation about what currently exists in that definition.  Vice-President Hanrahan said that it had been discussed a number of times, but said she would appreciate it if the Commission could go over it to articulate if the BIC can diverge from that.  President Hirsch stated that there are certain conditions that cannot be abrogated.  Vice-President Hanrahan said that she would like to know all of those different parameters. 

 

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.

• E-mail dated July 20, 2005 from Phil Ting to BIC Secretary Ann Aherne resigning his position as a Commissioner on the BIC.
• Copy of letter dated July 25, 2005 from Board of Supervisors’ President Aaron Peskin to Mayor Gavin Newsom regarding Commissioner Phil Ting’s resignation from the BIC and the appointment of Debra Walker.
• Copy of letter dated July 12, 2005 from Francis K. Chatillon resigning his seat on the Access Appeals Commission.
• Copy of letter dated July 14, 2005 from Paraic O’Donoghue, Managing Member, 1054 Haight Street LLC regarding 1054 Haight Street, Block 1236, Lott 016.
• Various correspondence dated July 20, 2005 through July 25, 2005 between Commissioner Guinnane and Acting Director Amy Lee regarding meeting to discuss Filbert Street Project.
• Copy of Letter dated July 26, 2005 from Acting Director Amy Lee to Mr. Joe Sherer of Legacy Builders regarding 2740-2742 Filbert Street.
• Letter dated July 27, 2005 from Joe Sherer to BIC Secretary Ann Aherne requesting change of date for Appeal on Filbert Street.
• Letter dated July 26, 2005 from Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson to Mr. Albert Urrutia, S.E. regarding request for emergency order to demolish 2005 – 19^th Street.
• Letter dated July 26, 2005 from Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson to Mr. Albert Urrutia, S.E. regarding request for emergency order to demolish 538 Laidley Street.
• Copy of the BOMA San Francisco ADVOCATE dated July 22, 2005.
• Copies of letters received from customers recognizing a job well done by DBI employees.

Commissioner Lee said that he wanted to talk about items a and b and then maybe e, f and g.

Commissioner Lee said that at the last meeting the Commission did not get a chance to congratulate Phil Ting on his appointment to the Assessor’s Office.  Commissioner Lee said that he wanted to publicly congratulate Mr. Ting on the appointment and wish him well on the upcoming election.  Commissioner Lee stated that he also wanted to congratulate Commissioner Walker and said that he might not always agree with her, but said that he hoped that they could have an open dialogue. 

President Hirsch asked for any discussion on other communication items.  Commissioner Lee said that he wanted to discuss e,f and g which was the Filbert Street item.  Commissioner Lee said that he thought this was an urgent matter at the last meeting and asked if this had now been delayed.   Secretary Aherne said that because the appellant knew that there was not going to be a full quorum of the Commission at this meeting the appellant asked for this item to be held over for another meeting.  President Hirsch said that it was the applicant that requested the delay.  Secretary Aherne explained that with an appeal the appellant has to get four votes from the Commissioners regardless of the amount of Commissioners present at the meeting; with five Commissioners being present today, the appellant would still have to get four votes to win the appeal. 

Commissioner Lee asked if staff was moving diligently on this matter and not delaying the process in any way.  Mr. Wing Lau said that at this point the project has been stopped for almost three months, but the Department is proceeding with the normal process.  President Hirsch asked if this was the project where the third story 2 x 6 studs were shown and gyp board installed so the wall had to be taken down and put back.  Commissioner Lee said that was correct and stated that he wanted to make sure that DBI is not slow in reacting to people’s concerns.  Commissioner Lee said that being a Commissioner on this Commission he now gets call, requests and comments from people asking for help and asking why certain things are stuck in the Building Department; why their permit has not been approved and such. Commissioner Lee said that he always tells the public that they can bring an issue up to the Commission and asks that the public’s concerns are real.  Commissioner Lee stated that he did not want a member of the public to come before the Commission and blame the Department for something that was caused by the project sponsor’s Architect, Engineer or Contractor and said that in many instances the complainant has found that there was a problem with the people that they were hiring and the documentation that was submitted.  Commissioner Lee said that he wanted to give confidence to DBI employees that they are doing a good job in a timely manner.

Mr. Wing Lau said that regarding Filbert Street he did not think that the Department delayed on anything because once DBI was aware of the situation Mr. Lau met with the Contractor.  Mr. Lau said that he and Mr. Hutchinson went out to the site to tell the Contractor exactly what was required, but the Contractor did not respond quickly.  Mr. Lau said that then Mr. Hutchinson made a decision based on the Contractor’s submittal and said that he believed that the Department had done everything right to this point. 

President Hirsch asked if Mr. Lau had any comments on item 8d, 1054 Haight Street.  Mr. Lau said that he had just gotten the information, but stated that after several revisions this permit was being sent to Fire for review and then the permit would be issued.  President Hirsch said that this issue was now moot. 

President Hirsch asked for public comment.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue said that he was going to speak primarily on item a, on Filbert Street and some of the other issues.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Commissioner Lee was right to start asking questions about the Department slowing down the process, because the answer is yes.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that with the recent change within the Department hierarchy and selections of various people in terms of temporary promotions, the philosophy has changed in the Department and now it is time for those people to cover their toukas.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that decisions are made by people like Mr. Hutchinson on a very conservative basis that is now impacting the Department because no bureaucrat or employee is now going to make a decision that implies or gives latitude for fear that they will be brought up on charges at the top.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that what would have happened in the past in the case of Filbert would be that the person in charge would have overruled Mr. Hutchinson and made a decision based on the facts.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that what happened in this case was that Mr. Hutchinson made a call that was very conservative in nature because now he is going by the book to make a justified interpretation.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that in other words Mr. Hutchinson did not take responsibility on this one and then the Acting Director and new Acting Chief Inspector likewise decided to play this by the book because the Acting Director does not have the technical skill that people in the past, such as Larry Litchfield had.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this is happening throughout the entire Department, the attitude of letting someone else make the decision so the Department’s productivity is going to suffer enormously and there are going to be delays.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Filbert Street issue should have been overruled by the Acting Director because when you look at it you cannot put sheetrock on the outside without taking the existing 2 x 4 membranes down.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this was what the plans called for and said that this decision was absolutely ludicrous.

9.

Review Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.

 

a.

Inquiries to Staff.  At this time, Commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures, which are of interest to the Commission.

 

b.

Future Meetings/Agendas.  At this time, the Commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a Special Meeting and/or determine those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the Building Inspection Commission.

 

 

Commissioner Walker asked that Mr. Lau take back the joint congratulations of the Commission to Acting Director Amy Lee and her daughter.  Commissioner Lee said that he would concur and asked that Mr. Lau wish Amy Lee and her family well.  President Hirsch said that he would trust that this would be unanimous with the Commissioners. 

President Hirsch said that he and other members would be away for the next meeting so there would probably not be a quorum and also that the first meeting in September would fall on Labor Day.  Secretary Aherne said that the Commission would have to hear the appeal on Filbert Street and said that there were possibly two other appeals coming to the Commission.  Secretary Aherne suggested holding a Special Meeting.  Vice-President Hanrahan said that she agreed that the Commission should try to have a Special Meeting.  Secretary Aherne suggested August 22^nd or the 29^th.  President Hirsch said that the 22^nd would be fine.  Secretary Aherne said that she would confirm with all of the Commissioners and the appellants.

10.

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

 

There was no further public comment.

 

11.

   Adjournment.

Commissioner Romero made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Walker, that the meeting be adjourned.  The motion carried unanimously.

 

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 045-05

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,

______________________

Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary