Building Inspection Commission
BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)
Department of Building Inspection (DBI)
Wednesday, February 6, 2002
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 408
Adopted March 6, 2002
MINUTES
The meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 3:15 p.m. by President Fillon.
1. Roll Call - Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.
COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Alfonso Fillon, President Denise D'Anne, Commissioner
Bobbie Sue Hood, Vice-President Esther Marks, Commissioner
Roy Guinnane, Commissioner Rodrigo Santos, Commissioner
Debra Walker, Commissioner, excused
Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary
D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:
Frank Chiu, Director
Amy Lee, Assistant Director
William Wong, Deputy Director
Sonya Harris, Secretary
President Fillon stated that he would like to address Agenda Item #4 first, as the members who were going to be sworn in had been waiting for some time. The Commissioners had no objection.
4. Action to appoint and swear in members of the Code Advisory Committee, all for a term of three years.
a. Michael T. Fretz, to the CAC as the Small Project Civil Engineer
b. Nicholas Palter to the CAC as the Member-At-Large
c. Lee Yvonne Phillips to the CAC as the Disability Access Advocate
d. Livio Socal to the CAC as the Remodel Contractor
President Fillon asked if those persons present to be sworn in would approach the podium. President Fillon asked for a motion to approve these members.
Commissioner Santos made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guinnane, to approve the members mentioned. The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC 009-02
President Fillon administered the Oath of Office to Nicholas Palter and Lee Yvonne Phillips. Mr. Fretz and Mr. Socal were not present. President Fillon congratulated Mr. Palter and Ms. Phillips and thanked them for their willingness to serve on the CAC.
5. Action to appoint and swear in member of the Unreinforced Masonry Building Appeals Board.
a. Tony Thompson to the UMB as a Civil Engineer
b. Howard Zee to the UMB as a Civil Engineer
President Fillon called on Mr. Thompson and Mr. Zee to approach the podium.
Commissioner Guinnane made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Hood to approve the appointments of Mr. Thompson and Mr. Zee to the UMB. The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC 010-02
President Fillon administered the Oath of Office to Mr. Thompson and Mr. Zee. President Fillon congratulated Mr. Thompson and Mr. Zee and thanked them for their willingness to serve and wished them luck.
President Fillon stated that the Commission would return to Item #2 on the agenda.
2. Election of BIC President and Vice-President.
President Fillon said that he had been President for the past year and would like to run again. President Fillon asked for any nominations.
Commissioner Guinnane nominated Commissioner Fillon for President; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Hood.
Ms. Anastasia Yovanopoulos asked if this was the election of officers for the next coming year. President Fillon said that was correct. Ms. Yovanopoulos stated that she had been coming to the BIC meetings since 1997 and said that she remembered when the new members came in; that is Esther Marks, Denise D'Anne, Mr. Santos and Ms. Walker, that Mr. Fillon, Bobbie Sue Hood, and Mr. Guinnane were carried over from prior times. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that she had made the comment that Mr. Fillon is occupying the seat of a Non-Profit Housing Developer and that he is not one. Ms. Yovanopoulos said that this vote, to her is a concern because the Board is out of
balance and the seat should be occupied by the people it is supposed to be occupied by and just carrying over and nominating himself may be convenient for Mr. Fillon, but said that she did not know if the members of the public would agree. Ms. Yovanopoulos thanked the Commission.
Secretary Aherne stated that there was a motion and a second to elect Alfonso Fillon President of the Building Inspection Commission for one year and the Commission voted on the motion as follows:
Vice-President Hood Yes
Commissioner Guinnane Yes
Commissioner D'Anne Yes
Commissioner Marks Yes
Commissioner Santos Yes
President Fillon Yes
The motion carried by a vote of 6 to 0.
President Fillon thanked the Commissioners for electing him and stated that it was a great honor. President Fillon said that the coming year would be a real challenge with the totally new financial situation that needs to be addressed and there is a lot of hard work to do. President Fillon said that he looks forward to working with the Commissioners and staff.
President Fillon said that the next order of business would be the election of a Vice-President. Commissioner Santos made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Guinnane to elect Commissioner Hood as Vice-President of the Building Inspection Commission.
Secretary Aherne took a roll call vote. The Commission voted as follows:
President Fillon Yes
Commissioner Guinnane Yes
Commissioner D'Anne Yes
Commissioner Marks Yes
Commissioner Santos Yes
Vice-President Hood Yes
The motion carried by a vote of 6 to 0.
Vice-President Hood thanked the Commissioners for their support and their vote and said that she hoped to assist the President and represent each one of the Commissioners in helping them to realize their goals for the Commission.
President Fillon said that there was a request from one of the Commissioners to hear Item #9 out of order. There were no objections.
9. Discussion on DRAFT Code of Professional Conduct (and update on audit items). [Controller's Office and Amy Lee]
Assistant Director Amy Lee said that the Controller's Office would be making their presentation and she would be available for any questions.
Mr. Mark Tipton introduced himself as a Performance Auditor for the Controller's Office and thanked the Commission for having them back again. Mr. Tipton said that he was before the Commission last year regarding the performance audit of the Department that was completed in June. Mr. Tipton said that one of the recommendations that was made in that audit is what he wanted to highlight. Mr. Tipton said that one of the key recommendations was to implement an exclusive policy prohibiting the Department's employees from giving any customer improper, preferential treatment. Mr. Tipton stated that the Controller's Office further recommended that this policy should be part of a Code of Ethics developed by the Department with the assistance of the City's Ethics Commission and should be adopted by the Commission. Mr. Tipton said that Ms. Jodi Darby was present to speak to that Code of Ethics; Ms. Darby worked with the Department and many, many people to make this happen. Mr. Tipton stated that he did want to say that the audit overall, which had over thirty recommendations was presented in October and at that time a status report was given by DBI staff. Mr. Tipton stated that normally the Controller's Office does a six-month follow-up, so that report was a little early as that was a four-month follow-up in October. Mr. Tipton said that the Controller's Office would do a one-year follow-up in June of this year, and at that time they will come back and give the Commission a status report on all of the recommendations of the audit. Mr. Tipton turned the microphone over to Ms. Darby.
Vice-President Hood asked if the Code of Ethics was just for DBI or if it was for all of the departments in the City. Ms. Darby said that taking the narrower view it was developed for DBI, however it has been shared with the City Attorney who is currently working with DHR and said that the City Attorney expressed interest in adopting some of the language.
Ms. Darby introduced herself as being on the City Projects' Team and said that Karina Monson was also present. Ms. Darby said that she and Ms. Monson formed the team that worked with the Department to assist in implementing two audit recommendations; the first as Mr. Tipton mentioned was that DBI develop a policy ensuring that employees avoid giving improper preferential treatment to customers and to do that with the enactment of a Code of Ethics. Ms. Darby said that the draft Code of Professional Conduct was the result of their assignment to develop such a code. Ms. Darby stated that the audit also recommended that employees be helped to understand the City's procedure for whistle blowers; to implement that recommendation a whistle blower information brochure was developed and that had already been distributed to staff. Ms. Darby said that the Commissioners received a copy of the draft Code of Professional Conduct and the whistle blower brochure. Ms. Darby said that there was one update that was made to that Code. Ms. Darby said that the handbook contained more than just the Code of Ethics as recommended by the audit because, in the initial stages of this project, it became clear that the Department would additionally benefit from a more extensive deliverable than just the Code of Ethics. Ms. Darby said that the deliverable evolved as a sectional handbook and said that she hoped it would be reproduced and presented with sections that are tabulated for ease of use by the staff members. Ms. Darby said that the first section included the preliminary code. Ms. Darby said that it was suggested that DBI might want to use a term other than code
since code has a specific connotation to this Department, but for the purposes of the preliminary draft it was titled the Code of Professional Conduct. Ms. Darby reported that the code included seven broad workplace values and a set of "I will" standards to support those values that were
submitted by DBI staff during nine focus group sessions. Ms. Darby said that a total of eighty-five managers and staff were invited to these sessions. Ms. Darby said that she used the word preliminary when referring to the Code of Professional Conduct because, as was discussed with all of those who participated in its development, the code as it is presented now in the handbook, is meant to be a draft baseline for Department Management and staff to develop further. Ms. Darby said that, as was communicated in conversations with Department staff, she hoped the handbook would be viewed by staff as a living document. Ms. Darby said that DBI Management and staff would be expected to involve themselves in making it more applicable to the daily work by suggesting bringing into the code other standards agreed to by Management and staff. Ms. Darby stated that this would involve continued discussion in order to make the code itself an enforceable policy; it would also probably be necessary to involve DBI bargaining units. Ms. Darby said that the remainder of the handbook is not a draft, but a complete document based on current policy and law, specifically to support the code values and standards. Ms. Darby said that the handbook includes guidelines answering questions posed by DBI staff during the project. Ms. Darby stated that additionally the handbook included summaries of current DBI, City and other applicable policies as well as a resource list to assist with further questions. Ms. Darby said that she and Karina worked with nearly one hundred people through focus groups, individual interviews and consultations to develop the handbook over almost four months. Ms. Darby said that they received significant support from two Deputy City Attorneys, Julie Moll and Gina Rockanova and the Deputy Executive Director of the Ethics Commission, Mable Eng. Ms. Darby stated that through this collaborative effort she felt that a helpful document was being delivered to DBI that will give staff support in making their professional conduct decisions and said she hoped staff would use it to further the discussion of professional conduct within the Department. Ms. Darby said that the current handbook language would be revised when new policies or laws become effective. Ms. Darby said that she would be happy to answer any questions.
President Fillon asked what the enforcement of this code would be and asked how Ms. Darby saw this handbook being used by staff to achieve goals. Ms. Darby said that as discussed with Amy and Frank, the code as it stands now is not in itself an enforceable policy document. Ms. Darby said that the policies that it is based on are enforceable as they have already, through time, been delivered to staff and have their own enforcement sections; however, as discussed with the City Attorneys it would be possible through discussion with the bargaining units to make this an enforceable policy document for the Department with the usual meet and confer process. Ms. Darby said that there was nothing radically new in the code; it is based on common sense, acceptable workplace values and current policies and standards. Ms. Darby stated that the Department would probably want to broaden this document by bringing in additional points and that will involve meet and confer.
Commissioner Marks said that she was concerned about how to disseminate this code to staff so that they will read and understand it. Commissioner Marks stated that sometimes she receives calls that she refers to the Department and usually tells the person to call either Director Chiu or Assistant Director Lee. Commissioner Marks said that she does not intend for these people to
get special favors, but just wants to make sure that she is directing the caller to the right person. Commissioner Marks stated that it needs to be made clear to staff that it is improper for anyone
to expect special treatment. Ms. Lee said that this code was going to be distributed to all staff and there would be meet and confer meetings with all of the bargaining units. Ms. Lee said that it was suggested that the staff receive training in the form of open Q & A meetings to explain these guidelines, so even if they don't read it staff will know that this is happening. Ms. Lee said that it is her policy that even if a staff member does not read the employee handbook it does not mean that it is not applicable to that person. Ms. Lee said that those issues need to be balanced and management would explain the action of this document and try to encourage staff to use this handbook as a guideline; but until the Department works with the Unions to get some teeth into this, the Department cannot necessarily use it. Commissioner Marks said that she understood that the Department would have to meet with the Unions, but was concerned about staff's general understanding of what this means.
Ms. Lee said that another issue that comes up is if there is a complaint from a public citizen and that person would call either the Director or herself, from staff's perception, for either Frank or herself to ask a staff member to look into a problem with a permit, it is perceived as preferential treatment, because the request comes from Management. Ms. Lee said that it is very difficult to explain to staff the definition of preferential treatment because many times the Department will receive a call from a member of the Board of Supervisors about a property where there is a life safety issue and the Department will send someone out and take care of it right away. Ms. Lee said that this is different from the other problem of the person making the most noise getting the attention, but it could still be perceived as preferential treatment. President Fillon said that one thing that should not be done is to just give the handbook to staff and expect them to read it because he stated that with every employee handbook he ever received he just stuck it in a file. President Fillon said that this handbook is great as long as the Department holds workshops to send a strong message to staff that this is an important issue. President Fillon stated that it is very difficult to differentiate between what is customer service and preferential treatment because it is such a fine line, particularly in this Department that exists in a problem-solving environment. President Fillon said that a lot of people gauge their success by how successful they are at solving problems. President Fillon said that this is an issue that the Department would always be dealing with. President Fillon asked if as the Department developed training on this issue, the Commission could be kept informed of the progress.
Vice-President Hood said that she wondered about the whole question of outside work because she thought that this had been at the heart of some of the problems in dealing with preferential treatment. Vice-President Hood said that when she read a section, and stated that she was an English major and an architect with thirty years experience, she could not understand it. Vice-President Hood said that it sounded to her that staff could do no outside work and asked if that were true or not. Ms. Darby asked if Vice-President Hood could point to a specific question. Vice-President Hood referred to Item #14 and #15. Ms. Darby said that she had extensive conversations with the City Attorney on this point and the policy, as she understood it, is that it does not prohibit outside employment, but it requires that those who have additional work, and there are certain definitions behind work, must complete a form with DHR. Ms. Darby said that the person must notify DHR that they have this additional work and seek permission to perform it. Vice-President Hood said if someone were offered a speaking fee at some conference would it have to be approved by DHR. Ms. Darby said that she did not believe so because she was not the authority on that, but there was some language on the reverse of the form that requests
permission that specifies what defines work; some contractual work is excluded, such as the minimal work that Vice-President Hood stated. Ms. Darby said that she could refer Vice-President Hood to the City Attorney's Office. Vice-President Hood said that this code is supposed to explain that and that is her problem with it, as she felt it was totally obscure. Vice-President Hood stated that if she could not understand it, and said that she reads a great deal including things that are very technical, and yet she cannot understand this document and Ms. Darby couldn't explain it, therefore she did not think it was clear. Vice-President Hood said that she felt that it should be made clear and very specific to even say that a staff member could accept fees for x, but could not accept fees for y, and this needs some clarity. Ms. Darby said that as with many of the policies and regulations of the City, some are a little fuzzy and that is why there is a phone number provided so that people could call to get an explanation for specific situations. Ms. Darby said that the policy, as she understands it, is that if an employee holds outside employment or intends to hold outside employment, they must complete a form through DHR seeking permission to have that additional work. Ms. Darby said that there are some definitions that DHR has on what involves work and what doesn't. President Fillon said that this issue was more complicated than what could be shown in the handbook. President Fillon left the meeting at this point. Vice-President Hood said that there were contradictory things in the handbook and read the part that said that if an employee was performing any duties for another employer within the City and County or outside, and said that this would include all employers in the world because every employer in the world is either in San Francisco or outside, for which the employee is to receive compensation in any form including salary, wage, fee or commission refer to the back of the form for guidelines for whether prior permission for outside work is necessary. Vice-President Hood said that to her it would all require permission because by saying every employer either in the City or outside, and the booklet describes the whole world of possible employers, and then it says there are some exceptions. Vice-President Hood stated that it doesn't make any sense and it is logically inconsistent. Vice-President Hood said that the booklet states that any outside work cannot be in conflict with regular duties and asked what that meant. Commissioner Marks said that she understood what it meant.
Ed Harrington introduced himself as the City Controller and said that if he was going to speak somewhere as the City Controller he should not be getting a fee, but if he was speaking before an association that he belongs to maybe he should. Vie-President Hood said that the booklet talks about if Mr. Harrington is the Controller and he is going somewhere to talk about not being the Controller of San Francisco, but if he belongs to an association and his plane ticket is paid for by the association the booklet says that the Controller would have to get permission to accept that. Commissioner Marks said that she felt that Vice-President Hood was reading into this too much because when she read it she thought that it was pretty clear cut that a person who works in the Department cannot have outside work period, unless they get special approval. Commissioner Marks said that if someone got an offer of a plane fare to Timbuktu to give a speech related to the specialty that someone has because they work for the Department of Building Inspection that person should ask about it. Commissioner Marks said that she would suspect that most situations are not going to be that kind of borderline where the average person could not be able to figure it out. Commissioner Marks stated that the intent is clear, that a person who works in DBI should
not be having an outside occupation especially an occupation where, because of their position in DBI, is the reason why they are going to get a job outside. Vice-President Hood said that the
handbook should just say that, because people violate this all the time and if it is not said in plain, understandable language people do not know what they are supposed to do. Vice-President Hood said that she was just saying that the handbook is not clear. Mr. Harrington said that the Civil Service Commission intentionally made it that way because they want the rule to be that a person cannot do it without their approval and they want to do the approval on a case by case basis and do not want people interpreting it by having the Controller's Office start to list the kinds of things that are exceptions. Vice-President Hood said that this has been there for a long time and it hasn't worked and every time there is something that is vague and ambiguous, it won't work. Mr. Harrington said that it is not vague because it says that a person cannot do it without DHR's permission and that is not vague. Mr. Harrington said that there are a variety of rules and they are intentionally set up the way they are and this should not be vague to anyone because this says that a person cannot work outside for any compensation without the approval of the Civil Service Commission Department of Human Resources and they reserve the right to make that judgment on a case by case basis and they do not want examples given that can then be misconstrued or put them in a place where they can't make a decision. Vice-President Hood said that if the handbook said what Mr. Harrington just said it would be perfectly clear, but it does not say that. Commissioner Marks said that it was clear to her. Mr. Harrington said that he would be happy to take a look at it again. Vice-President Hood said that she wished Mr. Harrington would look at it again because the whole purpose is to help people do the right thing and the handbook is not clear.
Vice-President Hood said that there is another issue she wondered about and that is where an employee has a member of their family or a close acquaintance with a monetary link working outside in an area that is related to work in the City. Vice-President Hood said that she has seen this occur in various departments in the City and asked if this handbook addressed that situation. Commissioner Marks said that she did not see anything in the handbook and thought that this was a very valid issue to bring up as she said that she did not know how this was dealt with. Commissioner Marks said that she had also observed this situation and said that to her this was as much of a concern as the employee themselves working for another person especially if this other person does business in the Department. Mr. Harrington said that was a good point and this was listed looking at the employee's point of view, but the employee's attachments, ,so to speak, are important to that. Mr. Harrington stated that the Statement of Economic Interest is supposed to cover this, but stated that he did not how deep that went in the Department. Ms. Lee said that the Statement of Economic Interest did go some line staff such as Building Inspectors, but it does not go to most of the clerical staff. Commissioner Marks said that the Economic Disclosure statement deals specifically with San Francisco, so if for example, an employee's spouse had an office in Oakland, but did business in San Francisco the employee would not have to identify that their spouse or significant other was fully employed in the construction business in Oakland. Mr. Harrington said that he thought the employee would have to disclose this because in the Statement of Economic Interest it gives a listing of the different relationships and it pretty much asks if there is any monetary compensation related to those relationships that could be benefited from. Mr. Harrington said that he believed that if someone had a spouse that did any business in San Francisco no matter where their business was located, it would have to be disclosed. Commissioner Marks stated that the only reason she was aware of this is because when she was on the Board of Permit Appeals one of the Commission members was in Real
Estate and the office he was connected to was located outside of San Francisco. Commissioner Marks said that this situation was discussed and this particular Commissioner decided to disclose the information, but the form specifically mentioned San Francisco. Mr. Harrington said that he had not heard that interpretation from anyone before, but said he would take a look to see if this kind of guidance should be included. Vice-President Hood stated that she thought that it would be good to have some reference as it relates to paragraph 14 in the handbook. Mr. Harrington said that he felt that he should talk to the City Attorney about was the fact that in many cases on the Statement of Economic Disclosure the idea there is Sunshine, and not prohibition; it is the idea that others should know if there is a potential conflict, but it is not that the conflict would prohibit someone from doing business. Mr. Harrington said that this would have to be very carefully written about what the City's interpretation might be; just because an employee has a relationship with someone who does similar business should not prohibit someone from doing their job, but people need to be aware that there is a possible conflict. Mr. Harrington said that there are different rules that kick in at different levels and unfortunately they are not always clear. Vice-President Hood asked, if for example, someone in the Department had a spouse who worked for someone who did business with the Department or used the Department's services; would that be a problem. Vice-President Hood said that the handbook is saying that a person working in the Department cannot receive money from an outside consultant or something, but if that person is a spouse of an outside person who is doing work for that outside person and given California community property laws it is their money; how is this dealt with? Mr. Harrington asked Ms. Boyajian to comment. Commissioner Marks said that it is not dealt with. Mr. Harrington said that he felt that it was disclosure not prohibition, but said that he would check with the City Attorney. Vice-President Hood said to her, she did not see the difference. Ms. Lee said that when she fills out her Statement of Economic Disclosure she discloses that her husband works for a company in the City of San Francisco. Ms. Lee said that if someone's spouse worked for a construction company that does business with DBI it would have to be disclosed. Mr. Harrington said that if the income was received for something that an employee had to approve that would be a conflict, but the fact that a spouse happens to be in the business would not necessarily be a conflict. Mr. Harrington said that he did not want to overstate what these rules are.
Mr. Harrington said that he wanted to comment on something that came up earlier regarding what happens if somebody calls the office, and they call Ms. Lee and she goes down and talks to an employee and says that so and so needs this done and could they take a look at it; when is that considered preferential treatment and when is it just good customer service. Mr. Harrington said that he thought that there are some things that an employee could do to protect themselves. Mr. Harrington said that it might be quite appropriate for anyone that is in a position of power, being the Commission, the Board, the Mayor's Office or anyone outside of DBI to only go through Mr. Chiu or Ms. Lee. Mr. Harrington said that Mr. Chiu and Ms. Lee are in theory important managers who can respond to these people appropriately because they have a much different level of ability to respond than a line worker who gets a phone call from the Mayor's Office. Mr. Harrington said that is a very unequal level of response possible there, so he thought it would be quite appropriate as a Commission or as Managers dealing with staff to talk about how the Department might want to limit or make sure that when calls or contacts are made they should be made to an appropriate level. Mr. Harrington said that the Department should not miss the
opportunity to straighten out some of those things that might be occurring. Commissioner Marks said that she would like the issue of disclosure regarding spouses to be on a future agenda.
Vice-President Hood said she had one more question about how this handbook was going to be used and said that there was something about whistle blowers that she hadn't read. Vice-President Hood said, as an example, suppose somebody observes what they perceive to be preferential treatment, not just on a one-time basis but on a continuing basis, which is apparently what came up in the audit. Vice-President Hood asked how an employee would deal with that. Ms. Darby said that she would first caution the employee to include the words "perception of preferential treatment" because in some of the cases in the audit staff felt that there was a perception of preferential treatment. Ms. Darby said that there is not always the reality of preferential treatment and one of the things that has been discussed repeatedly with Frank and Amy is how to clarify in some areas to avoid this perception. Ms. Darby stated that in some cases it is perfectly normal procedure to call someone up to the head of the line just to receive a form or a plan that may have been arranged ahead of time, but somebody standing around in the lobby may perceive that as preferential treatment. Ms. Darby said that she wanted to caution about the perception of preferential treatment as opposed to actual preferential treatment; however to the question, in the case of a staff member who feels they have noticed preferential treatment, the Controller's Office would recommend and have recommended that they speak to the other staff member about this situation just to clarify what in fact is going on. Ms. Darby said the person should let the other employee know that they are uncomfortable with the situation. Ms. Darby said that the Controller's Office was not encouraging a lot of whistle blowing, but are merely providing this as an option for those who do see some sort of illegal untoward conduct going on in the Department. Ms. Darby said that whistle blowing is one of the options, speaking directly to the person about it is an option, and the Department could help a lot by defining customer service issues specifically. Vice-President Hood said that one of the reasons she presented this is because she understands whistle blowing where there is something that is quantitative, where people are getting discounts on fees or something like that, but it is very hard when using the word illegal that there is no clear line between something that could grow out of friendship or knowledge and somebody who is coming in and doing something such as bribery. Vice-President Hood said that it would mean that there was money changing hands with someone; however if someone sees something that might be fuzzy she wouldn't see a whistle blower there. Vice-President Hood said that this would be like tattling on some trivial thing on the playground, but at the other end there might be a legal situation and there are legal remedies. Ms. Darby said that is why the Department is being encouraged to use this document as a basis for discussion because it is important for all staff to be involved in any discussion about preferential treatment to provide clarification in these areas.
Vice-President Hood asked for any public comment. There was no public comment. Vice-President Hood said that she did not believe that the Commission needed to take any action on this, as it was an informational discussion. Ms. Lee said that the handbook would be distributed to staff. Vice-President Hood thanked Ms. Darby for her report. Ms. Darby said that she wanted to thank DBI Management for their enthusiasm about this project, especially Amy Lee.
Commissioner Marks said that she would have to leave the meeting, but stated that she would like the issue about spouses regarding conflict of interest to be calendared for a future meeting. Commissioner Marks said that she was also thinking of the issue of when a member of the public
contacts one of the Commissioners, it is better to refer that matter to either Amy or Frank, but then maybe they would be overwhelmed.
Vice-President Hood said that she was skipping to Item #8 so that the Commission could do the budget.
8. Report, discussion and possible action on the proposed budget of the Department of Building Inspection for fiscal year 2002-2003. [Taras Madison, Administration and Finance Manager]
Ms. Lee said that Ms. Madison had a family emergency and was out of town so she would be presenting the budget. Ms. Lee said that she was presenting some follow-ups from the previous attachments that were sent to the Commissioners. Ms. Lee said that the Budget Committee met several times and hammered out some of the issues. Ms. Lee said that there were some cuts made in expenditures in both salary and non-salary expenditures. Ms. Lee reported that the Department was going to put forth a budget of $32.1M and is projecting revenues of hopefully $28.2M so the Department will have to use approximately $4M of surplus funds. Ms. Lee said that when saying that the Department is going to use $4M of surplus funds what is really meant is that the projects that were in deferred credit would be recognized, so $4M will be able to be utilized. Ms. Lee said that the Department is working on that now and are trying to recognize some revenue just to close this fiscal year. Ms. Lee said that there was discussion about cutting vacant positions and if the Department cut them that the Department would not be able to hire people if needed. Ms. Lee said that the Department thought that it would receive significant savings in keeping the positions, but not filling them, but unfortunately it would not save the money needed and would just lower the attrition rate. Ms. Lee said that this Department has an attrition rate of 7% and most City departments have a rate of 2% to 3% so this will have to be brought into a realistic number. Ms. Lee said that she understood the concern that the Department might not be able to hire when needed; however, because there is some money in the budget for temporary salaries and because these positions are being cut it really helps with the credibility of the Department in financially managing DBI. Ms. Lee said that when there was a boom and high demand for DBI's services the Department requested a lot of positions and were quite successful in getting the new positions for the past couple of years because DBI was able to demonstrate the need for these positions. Ms. Lee said that given the reduction in the volume of permits the Department needs to be proactive and prudent to make sure that the credibility is still intact because the Department will not need these vacant positions. Ms. Lee stated that these positions have been vacant for over a year and there is no justification to keep them on, as well as the fact that, there will probably be no reduction in service. Ms. Lee said that the Department was asking the Commission to approve this budget as submitted. Ms. Lee stated that there were some outstanding items that she wanted to report on and those were the work orders to the Police, the Environment and DPW have been deleted. Ms. Lee said that there are work orders that DBI is still working out with various departments. Ms. Lee said that the City Attorney's Office is projecting that DBI will use $1.2M worth of services, but the Department is reviewing that figure and actually asking staff to review some of the billings from the past months, so Ms. Madison put in the same figure from last year. Ms. Lee stated that is one figure that might increase. Ms. Lee said that DTIS is working with DBI to come up with a figure, but the Department did make reductions in cellular phones and pagers usage and actually removed these
items from some staff. Ms. Lee stated that the Department is monitoring these costs every month and asking staff to pay for any personal usage. Ms. Lee said that this issue is still up in the air.
Commissioner Guinnane said that he had about six items to discuss and one of them was when the credit card fee would be charged back to the customers. Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted a list of the users who benefited the most from not having to pay that fee. Ms. Lee said that as of February 15, 2002 the customer would be paying a fee of 2.1% to use a credit card. Commissioner Guinnane asked when Saturday service would be stopped. Ms. Lee said that the Saturday service had already stopped. Commissioner Guinnane asked about the premium pay and overtime. Ms. Lee said that the Department is mandated by the union to pay the premium pay and it is paid to certain classifications including some engineers and classification 5203 because they hold a special license. Ms. Lee said that premium pay of 3% is used for emergency standby and that is driven by the union. Commissioner Guinnane asked how many people are kept on standby at one time. Ms. Lee said that it is rotated and there are over a dozen or so people who rotate. Ms. Lee said that there are various people with specialties, who are on standby, and they include someone from plumbing, building, electrical and an engineer and that is why more than one individual is needed because the Department cannot speculate what kind of emergency there will be. Commissioner Guinnane asked about Professional Services and noted that it had gone down from $2.2M down to $1.1M. Ms. Lee said that Professional Services were all of those consulting fees and it included the Code Enforcement Program, the CAPSS the Committee on Seismic Safety program, all the Oracle development costs and peer review costs, as well as the credit card fees. Ms. Lee said that the Department has hired some Oracle developers and this was also cutting down on Professional Services. Commissioner Guinnane said that $977,000 was allocated to the City Attorney and stated that he would like that pulled back to $800,000. Commissioner Guinnane said that he had questions about auto maintenance as he had heard that if the Department takes a car to the Central Shops to get the oil changed the Department is charged $100.00. Ms. Lee said that because it is a City agency the Department couldn't shop around for better prices. Commissioner Guinnane said that he heard that if someone turns in a car for repairs it could take three or four months. Ms. Lee said that the Department has had problems with the operations at Central Shops and DBI met with the Director of Central Shops to ask them to speed up their repair time. Commissioner Guinnane asked if he could get a break down on Central Shop's charges for maintenance on things like brakes and oil changes. Commissioner Guinnane asked why Reproduction went from $70,000 to $135,000. Ms. Lee said that it was the same amount as last year and that is for all of DBI's forms and the bilingual ordinance that is coming in that requires the Department to produce forms in different languages so that is for the printing. Ms. Lee said that it is for all of the envelopes in the Department and is actually remaining the same as last year. Commissioner Guinnane said that last year there was $300,000 allocated to DPW. Ms. Lee said that initially there was, but the Controller's Office and the Mayor's Office made an error in some of the adjustments that they did, and put it in a different work order, so it was subsequently taken out; as a result the Department only provided DPW with $150,000 and that is not going to be continued next year. Commissioner Guinnane said that he would like the Secretary of the BIC to write a letter to the Controller's Office and the Mayor's Budget Office saying that once the BIC approves the budget any changes would have to come back and be approved by the Commission. Ms. Lee asked if Commissioner Guinnane meant the work order changes. Commissioner Guinnane said yes he
did not want any changes without the BIC approving them. Commissioner Guinnane said that in eliminating some of the positions the Department was only saving $1,622,000 and asked if there were any other position such as upper management positions that could be eliminated. Ms. Lee said that what was not reflected in the budget was some of the substitutions, as Commissioner Marks had asked the Department to eliminate the Manager V position that serves as the Public Information Officer. Ms. Lee said that this position is actually going to be transfer exchanged to the slightly lower position of an 1824 permanent position, so there are some substitutions that there were savings on, but these are positions the Department believed would not hurt its ability to provide services. Commissioner Guinnane asked what the Public Information Officer actually did. Ms. Lee said that the person in that position handles public inquiries so he provides public information to those persons and serves as a public liaison to the Unreinforced Masonry Building Program. Ms. Lee said that, in the past, there were some projects that needed a lot of attention and he served in terms of monitoring the progress of those projects and making sure all of the Departments involved would approve them. Commissioner Guinnane asked if this person was a spokesperson for DBI. Ms. Lee said that he was a spokesperson, but there have been some changes to his responsibilities so now Ms. Lee is serving in that role.
Vice-President Hood said that maybe her question had been answered before, but asked about the revenue transfer to Real Estate and asked if that was for purchasing the building. Ms. Lee said that was the debt service that the Department pays every year and that is another item that would be agendized for the next Commission meeting, as when the surcharge discussion was presented last year, it was said that it was going to be a yearly discussion. Ms. Lee stated that the Commission could decide to increase or decrease this surcharge and right now the Department is subsidizing 1% of the surcharge, but given the revenues the Department should no longer be subsidizing that.
Commissioner D'Anne said that it was her understanding that at one time there was supposed to be a position created for waste reduction and that it was to be a citywide program. Commissioner D'Anne said that she thought there was supposed to be a resource conservation person. Ms. Lee said that she was not aware of that. Commissioner D'Anne said that it was supposed to determine the way a Department handles material and find ways to reduce usage. Ms. Lee said that this would be the Mayor's Office or the Administrator that would create that position and this Department did not have the funds available for such a position. Commissioner D'Anne said that it would seem to be a useful position because there is a lot of waste in running offices everywhere and the Department could save a considerable amount of money, up into the millions. Ms. Lee said that if the Commission would like to create a program it could be agendized. Commissioner D'Anne said that she was actually the head of a similar program and would like to see DBI implement something like that. Vice-President Hood said that could be put on for a future agenda.
Commissioner Guinnane said that he had one more question about money that was allocated in prior years for the environmental department and asked if that money was spent. Commissioner Guinnane asked if there was any way for the Department to pull some of that back if it had not been spent. Ms. Lee said that the money had been given over to the department.
Vice-President Hood said that she did not have any more questions and asked if there were any comments from the public. There was no public comment.
Vice-President Hood asked for a motion from the Commission recommending the budget to the Mayor's Budget Office. Commissioner Guinnane said that it would be subject to the changes that were just discussed.
Commissioner Santos made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Hood, to recommend that the budget be sent to the Mayor's Office with the potential changes that arose after the review of the items that Commissioner Guinnane brought up. The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC 011-02
Ms. Lee said that she wanted to clarify the changes. Ms. Lee said that most of the items that were mentioned were already taken care of, such as the credit card issue and other things are reports that the Department would do for the Commission. Ms. Lee said that changes to the budget would be the reduction of the City Attorney to $800,000. Ms. Lee stated that the Department are no longer paying credit card fees, but the Department will provide a report at the next meeting about who the users were. Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to see if any one or two people benefited from the use of the credit cards as he was concerned why DBI, out of all of the Department's in the City, had no charge for the user. Commissioner Guinnane said that this really bothered him. Ms. Lee said that she would provide a report on the breakdown of Central Shops as well. Ms. Lee said that a letter would be written to the Controller's Office and the Mayor's Budget Office.
Vice-President Hood said that the next item discussed would be the report on the Litigation Committee.
10. Update on Litigation Committee Meetings. [Commissioners Guinnane, Santos and Walker]
Commissioner Santos said that there are some very juicy cases being discussed in the Litigation Committee meetings, but the Committee cannot disclose the names of the bad apples involved in this, but this could be potentially very financially rewarding for the Department. Commissioner Santos stated that the Committee would keep the Commission posted. Commissioner Guinnane asked if Commissioner Santos wanted to talk about the case that was recently filed with the AIMCO, which manages six hundred and sixty units. Commissioner Santos said that he did not think that he could actually state the company name. Commissioner Guinnane said that a case had been filed so now the information is public record.
Vice-President Hood said that she would like to move to agenda item #6 because Hanson Tom had been waiting so patiently.
6. Director's Report. [Director Chiu]
a. Report on new Special Inspection procedures.
Mr. Hanson Tom said that the staff was asked by the Commissioners to update the Special Inspection procedures and policies. Mr. Tom said that this has already been done and stated that the Department went through a lot of input from the Public Advisory Committee, SEAONC's specialty Committee and obtained input from other jurisdictions. Mr. Tom said that the form is now updated to conform to the present Code and said that the last issue of procedures was in April 1995. Mr. Tom stated that previously the Department only required the applicant to submit an 8½" X 11" inspection form and that form would be filed until future completion of the project. Mr. Tom said that what is required now is that the form has to be incorporated with the joint permit set at a minimum size of 11" X 17", so the Department will always have the record with the permit set. Mr. Tom said that there had been a lot of previous complaints about the form as the Department's Plan Check staff would adjust the form in whatever manner they felt was correct, but that is no longer allowed; if a form is adjusted on a Special Inspection item it will have to be agreed upon with the Engineer of Record so any revision to special inspection items will have to agreed on by them, not just DBI staff. Mr. Tom stated that the procedure now specifies the responsibility of the Plan Check Staff, the Inspection Staff and record keeping procedures. Mr. Tom said that this is now a little more in line and is a big improvement as to how the Department does the Special Inspection items. Vice-President Hood asked if that meant that when a customer goes to look up the address of a property they could see when they get the permits what the inspections have been as well. Vice-President Hood asked if this would be filed with all of the permits. Mr. Tom said that there would be a subject file, like what the Department has normally in the Special Inspection file; however right now the Department requires that the Special Inspection format has to be incorporated into the permit set and that means that the Department will know what inspection items are required. Mr. Tom said that many times the previous owners are not even aware that certain items are required if it is not in the permit set, so right now it is required to be in the permit set so the owner will understand that a Special Inspection is required. Mr. Tom said that this would be a big improvement. Commissioner Santos asked about the documents that are submitted by the Structural Engineers and said that typically the Special Inspection form is on structural sheet S1 as part of the drawing. Commissioner Santos said that Vice-President Hood was saying that once that is microfiched then anyone in the future who ordered the drawings would be able to see that on the structural sheet because now it is mandatory that the drawings will have that sheet within at least an 11" x 17". Mr. Tom said that now the Department has a standard format where the applicant has to specific the Special Inspection items in the format that the Department requires as part of the drawings. Mr. Tom said the procedures have gone through many reviews of the Code Advisory Committee and public input. Mr. Tom said that at the last Code Advisory Committee meeting it was recommended that these guidelines be used as an interim bulletin and then it will be adopted into an Administrative Bulletin and incorporated into a future Code change. Mr. Tom said that he was requesting that the Commission approve this so that the procedure could be implemented. Vice-President Hood said that she felt that the Department should not get too specific in the Code as it is better to leave some items as procedures that are easier to change later as problems come up. Vice-President Hood asked if these procedures were in the Code right now. Mr. Tom said that the Code, Chapter 17, says the Department has to have Special Inspections. Mr. Tom said that the Department requires people to submit that form, but there has been criticism from the public saying that they do not understand DBI's procedures and that is why the Department wants to convert it into an Administrative Bulletin. Director Chiu said that Vice-President Hood was correct in that this proposal is not to codify this, but it is to be an Administrative Bulletin so
that it could be changed. Vice-President Hood said to her that would be the proper place for it so a copy could be handed to someone, but it would be easier to change than the Code, which requires going to the Board of Supervisors. Director Chiu said that is what the Department is doing right now to formalize the process in an Administrative Bulletin. Vice-President Hood said that she felt that the changes were excellent and stated that the Commission would look through it in more detail. Vice-President Hood said that she appreciated that the Department has worked so hard on this and met with so many different groups that were concerned about it and found something that works for everyone. Vice-President Hood stated that the Commission looked forward to the implementation of this and said that Mr. Tom should come back perhaps a year from now and let the Commission know how it has worked and whether or not other changes should be made.
Vice-President Hood said that she would suggest that the Commission continue every other item on the agenda.
13. Public Comment: The BIC will take public comment on matters within the Commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.
There was no public comment.
14. Adjournment.
Commissioner Santos made a motion, seconded by Commission D'Anne, that the meeting be adjourned.
The motion carried unanimously.
RESOLUTION NO. BIC 012-02
Vice-President Hood thanked Assistant Director Lee for getting the budget all wrapped up and thanked Director Chiu for returning to the meeting.
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45p.m.
_______________________
Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary
SUMMARY OF REQUESTS BY COMMISSIONERS
DBI to develop training (Q&A sessions) for staff regarding the Code of Professional Conduct and keep the BIC informed as to progress. - President Fillon Page 6
Future Agenda Item - Disclosure regarding area of Conflict of Interest as related to spouse, significant other, etc. - Commission Marks Pages 9 - 10
Report on when credit card fee will be charged to customers and a list of customers who benefited from the free service. - Commissioner Guinnane Pages 12 - 14
Report on auto maintenance for DBI; list of fees charged by Central Shops. - Commissioner Guinnane Pages 12 & 14
Letter to be sent to Controller and Mayor's Budget Analyst regarding notification to the BIC of any changes in the submitted budget. - Commissioner Guinnane Pages 12 -13
Agendize increase/decrease of surcharge given budget situation. - Assistant Director Lee Page 13
Future Agenda Item - Develop Waste Reduction Program. - Commissioner D'Anne Page 13