City and County of San FranciscoDepartment of Building Inspection

Building Inspection Commission


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


BUILDING INSPECTION COMMISSION (BIC)
Department of Building Inspection (DBI)
SPECIAL MEETING
City Hall, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, Room 400
June 14, 2004
Adopted August 16, 2004

MINUTES

The regular meeting of the Building Inspection Commission was called to order at 9:03 a.m. by President Santos.


1.

Call to Order and Roll Call – Roll call was taken and a quorum was certified.

 

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENTS:

 

Rodrigo Santos, President
Bobbie Sue Hood, Vice-President
Alfonso Fillon, Commissioner
Esther Marks, Commissioner

Denise D’Anne, Commissioner
Matt Brown, Commissioner, excused
Roy Guinnane, Commissioner

 

Ann Aherne, Commission Secretary

 

D.B.I. REPRESENTATIVES:

 

Frank Y. Chiu, Director
Amy Lee, Assistant Director
Ken Harrington, Special Assistant to the Director
Jim Hutchinson, Deputy Director
William Wong, Deputy Director
Wing Lau,Chief Building Inspector
Sonya Harris, Secretary

2.

President’s Announcements.

President Santos had no announcements.

3.

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

Mr. Timothy Tistand of Steefel, Leavitt & Weiss said that his firm was representing Myers/Natoma venture and Myers Development Company, which is the permit holder on 80 Natoma.  Mr. Tistand said that he was delivering a letter to the Commission and had no additional comments other than those contained in the letter, but the short version for the public is that his firm believes that the testimony taken at last week’s meeting and the actions emanating from that meeting were improper in that there was no notice given to Myers.  Mr. Tistand stated that he believed that this violated the Brown Act and the San Francisco Sunshine Law and that the actions taken as a consequence were improper.  Mr. Tistand said that his firm regretted finding this Commission in that position and would hope that no further action or discussion about the 80 Natoma project would take place.  Mr. Tistand thanked the Commission.

Mr. Randy Shaw of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic said that last Wednesday at the Board of Supervisor’s Finance Committee it was proposed to take $1.3M more from this year’s budget to transfer to Planning and after public testimony was closed the Mayor’s Office asked to continue this item for another week.  Mr. Shaw stated that this is the second continuance and it is increasingly doubtful that the BOS can find a legal basis to take that money as it is now almost June 30th, the end of the fiscal year.  Mr. Shaw said that in terms of the legal issue and in looking at the San Francisco Administrative Code and the creation of the Building Inspection fund it says specifically as a Code provision that DBI fees must be exclusively to defray DBI costs.  Mr. Shaw stated that the Code says that to the extent that the Planning Department, Public Works and Real Estate are involved those portions of the fees immediately on the day that they are paid go to those departments.  Mr. Shaw said that separate and apart from when DBI meets with the City Attorney on the whole nexus issue, which has been at the heart of this discussion, he thought that there was a statutory prohibition and the Board of Supervisors could certainly amend a new statute that would take affect in future years, but certainly could not affect the fees collected to date.  Mr. Shaw said that he thought that if the City Attorney finds that DBI, even though it is an enterprise department, cannot sue the City for the taking of the funds said that the Department could get legal counsel and challenge that.  Mr. Shaw said that City Attorney Herrera had just lost a case in the Court of Appeal where he thought that he could represent an interest of a former client and he was wrong.  Mr. Shaw said he thought that it would be very odd in this case for the court to say that a Department, who is itself subject to legal liability for misspending of funds, could not go to court to prevent itself from being sued.  Mr. Shaw stated that he thought that there were options and said that he hoped the Commission would move forward to move to litigation because if the money is taken this year it doesn’t look very good for next year.  Mr. Shaw said that the DBI would never be able to hire another staff person, never renovate the offices or never be able to do anything with an artificially frozen budget because these millions will always be expected to fund other City services. 

Ms. Alice Barkley said that she wanted to respond to Mr. Tosta’s comment by saying that this Commission took no action last week on the matter of 80 Natoma; it was the Director that issued the Stop Work Order.  Ms. Barkley said that the matter would come back as a report to the BIC.  Ms. Barkley said that she wanted to speak about demolition.  Ms. Barkley stated that the issue of demolition has been very confusing for both members of the public and for DBI staff because of the Planning policies dating back to the Agnos administration.  Ms. Barkley stated that it has now gone over to, instead of looking at illegal demolitions, it has gone to DBI and the BIC looking at it and on the other hand the Planning Commission is looking at it.  Ms. Barkley said that the Planning Department has a whole different set of rules that are applied to a demolition permit.  Ms. Barkley said that at some point the two departments have to get together so there is a comprehensive policy that doesn’t conflict with each other.  Ms. Barkley stated that, more importantly, these policies are now affecting buildings that should have been allowed to be demolished, and in fact should have been ordered to be demolished, and these are buildings that are totally burned out and sitting around for five years.  Ms. Barkley said that everyone agrees that they have no structural integrity left, but because no one is seeing the buildings teetering, or falling down in the next hour, it is not in imminent danger.  Ms. Barkley said that what is in imminent danger is something that could happen, even though no one knows when, because the building is structurally unsafe.  Ms. Barkley stated that it should be allowed and required to demolish these buildings because they are in fact public hazards.  Ms. Barkley said that she thought that this Commission should start to address this issue to make some distinction about structurally unsound buildings and get that done.  Ms. Barkley referred to a building on Lombard Street that was damaged in a four-alarm fire where there is not one piece of wood that is structurally sound and it is charred throughout.  Commissioner Santos said that the Department has an emergency demolition order and said that typically includes a report from a structural engineer and then the City will have a structural engineer that would review it.  Commissioner Santos asked if Ms. Barkley thought that this would be where the Commission should start or what would she suggest.  Ms. Barkley said that she had requested an emergency demolition order and the Department have had staff out at the site.  Ms. Barkley stated that the City Inspector would not even go up the stairs the first time out; the Structural Engineer at DBI would not even stick his head through the front door after he saw the building and how burned out it was on the ground floor.  Ms. Barkley stated that despite this she is still asking for an emergency demo.  Ms. Barkley said that she thought that there was something very wrong with the process and it has to be separated from the rest of the demo process.

Vice-President Hood said that she would recommend calendaring this for another day in order to avoid violating the Brown Act.  Ms. Barkley thanked the Commission.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that he wanted to follow-up on what Ms. Barkley had said.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he coined the phrase “defacto” demolition in the 1980’s with the little Latin he had left over from school in Ireland.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it became the standard verbiage when any permit exceeded the scope of its permit it became a “defacto” demolition, and recently it is ironic that he is one of the persons who initiated the investigation into what is illegal actions by a few Plan Checkers in the Plan Check Division.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that he has recently been in very close discussions with Federal Authorities to ask for criminal activity to charges be levied against some of these persons responsible.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that at the time when he brought this to the attention of this Commission he indicated to the Commission to take care that the good people who followed the rules would not be now impacted by potential changes that would focus on the innocent rather than those guilty.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that unfortunately this has now happened because as Commissioner Bobbie Sue Hood already knows complaints are streaming into her and to other Architects in the City regarding the delays that have ensued at the counter against people, the 98% that abide by the laws, which now means that those who are now setting this policy are the ones responsible for the criminal acts that have occurred within the Plan Check Department.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this has now moved further right so that the statute calls for emergency legislation and not one building has fallen within the purview of emergency legislation.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the reason is that the foxes who are guarding the chicken coops are now refusing to go out and see any emergency, any danger or any liability to this Department which could result in deaths.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this is happening from the Director on down suddenly supporting the criminal actions by their actions.  Mr. O’Donoghue referred to cases on Irving Street, Lombard Street, and the St. Rose Academy that the Fire Department wouldn’t even go into unless there was a fire truck standing there.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that there are all sorts of precedents here because it is is now being interpreted that no action is good action because the players feel that they will be immunized from any prosecution that results from investigations; and there will be prosecution.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the BIC should direct the Director and onwards down that a building does not have to be falling down, but if an earthquake hits some of those buildings will in fact fall down and result in deaths.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was telling the Director that if this does happen he will be charged with criminal negligence on this instance so the Commission needs to be aware of what is happening within the Department.  Mr. O’Donoghue thanked the Commission. 

Vice-President Hood said that this was another item that should be calendared in the future as she had received many complaints and concerns.  President Santos asked if the complaints were about the slow down of the intake at the counter.  Vice-President Hood said that the complaints were about the processing of permits throughout the Department and said that she thought that the Commission needed to reach out to the Department to let them know that it has the Commission’s confidence.  Vice-President Hood said that the cases that are being reviewed at the Commission are not a condemnation of the Department, but just perhaps of a few people.  Vice-President Hood said that on the whole the Commission has a very strong regard for the Department and the employees and should make that clear.  President Santos said that he and Commissioner Guinnane had met with the Building Inspectors and had a very fruitful meeting in which they stated and emphasized the fact that the Commission has full confidence in the Department, but perhaps because the meetings are televised and some specific projects have come up that some people might find reluctance to do their jobs.  President Santos stated that it is important that the Department and the members of the Department understand that this Commission is not directing any type of witch-hunt towards anyone.  President Santos said that the Commission has full confidence in the Department and as he has stated before, this Department is the only department in the City that has consistently generated revenue for San Francisco and does a tremendous amount of work.  President Santos stated that he wanted Inspectors and Plan Checkers to know that they have the full support of the Commission.

Mr. John Hinchion of the Building Inspectors Association said that he wanted to say that he was totally disgusted with the double standards that are coming out of the Mayor’s Office at the moment.  Mr. Hinchion said that recently the Board of Supervisors sent legislation to DBI regarding Lead Abatement, which would help to protect tenants from the awful hazards of lead poisoning.  Mr. Hinchion stated that no sooner had the Mayor’s Office signed this legislation than they were trying to take $5.5M from this Department and that is money that could be used to enforce this ordinance.  Mr. Hinchion asked if the Mayor’s Office made a mistake in signing this legislation or did they make a mistake in trying to take the funding and said that he would suggest the latter.  Mr. Hinchion said that the Mayor’s Office is taking this children’s money over to reward the budget busting City Planning Department.  Mr. Hinchion stated that he hoped that with the help of this Commission the Mayor’s Office would not play their way out of this issue too fast.  Mr. Hinchion thanked the Commission.

Mr. Ed Sweeney introduced himself as a member of the Building Inspectors Association and stated that he was present to speak against the transfer of funds to other City departments.  Mr. Sweeney stated that these are not surplus funds, but funds collected in advance for DBI’s services and inspections for projects to be completed years from now.  Mr. Sweeney said that diverting these funds cheats the permit applicants who pay for their services from DBI and provides them a reduction of services and life safety hazards.  Mr. Sweeney thanked the Commission.

Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to thank Mr. Sweeney for his remarks, as the point that he made was extremely critical.

Mr. Tom Hui introduced himself as the Assistant Manager of Major Plan Check.  Mr. Hui said that his comments were about the transfer of funds to other departments.  President Santos said that the Commission was still on item #3.  Commissioner Fillon said that the agenda had already moved onto item #4a.

 

4.

CLOSED SESSION:   pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) and the San Francisco Administrative Code Section 67.10.

a.   Public Comment on all matters pertaining to the Closed Session.

Mr. Hui thanked the Commission and the Director because he stated he had worked for other City departments, but this was a Department where the staff could openly talk about issues.  Mr. Hui stated that he agreed with Mr. Sweeney because the funding that the Department gets from the permits on some of the major projects is continued for four or five years and that is why the funds need to be kept in order to hire more staff.  Mr. Hui said that currently the Department is understaffed and right now everybody is working hard on all of the projects.  Mr. Hui thanked the Commission.

Mr. Leo McFadden introduced himself as President of the Building Inspectors Association and a member of Carpenter’s Local 22.  Mr. McFadden said that the members of the Building Inspectors Association were very concerned about transferring these funds from DBI to other Departments because this sends a message to DBI Management that there is no reward for being fiscally responsible and punishes efficient money management.  Mr. McFadden stated that DBI is a model to other City departments and responsible departments should be left alone while other departments should be made self-sustaining.  Mr. McFadden said that the rank and file members of this Union are against giving away funds if layoffs are the result.  Mr. McFadden said that currently DBI is restricted from filling necessary vacant positions; Building Inspectors provide a valuable community service and taking DBI resources limits the ability to provide that service to the public.  Mr. McFadden thanked the Commission for taking on the task of trying to prevent the taking of these funds.

Vice-President Hood said that the very people who are asking for the transfer of these funds are going to turn around in the future when the chickens come home to roost and are going to say that Inspectors are not being sent out quickly enough.  Vice-President Hood said that the Department would not have enough people anymore and just because the Department planned for the rainy day and now have to give up those funds, it is shocking in a way and said that it was important that it be pointed out that the funds are collected for future work.  Vice-President Hood said she appreciated the Building Inspectors being present to comment on this matter.

Mr. Dennis Carlin of the Building Inspectors Association stated that he was present to speak against giving DBI funds to other City departments.  Mr. Carlin said that before he became a Building Inspector he was a General Contractor and during those lean years he knew what it was like robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Mr. Carlin said that everyone knew that this does not work.  Mr. Carlin said that recently the Building Inspectors went through an exercise regarding emergency response to an earthquake and if an earthquake such as the 1906 earthquake were to hit this area, which is predicted to happen in the next twenty to thirty years, the Department won’t have the funds to respond to the City’s needs or the resources.  Mr. Carlin said that the Inspectors are certified disaster response workers and said that it would be a huge mistake to take the funds and limit training and resources to effectively respond to a disaster in the City.  Mr. Carlin thanked the Commission.

Mr. Keith Mather introduced himself as a member of the Building Inspectors Association and Local 22 and said that he was present to speak against the transfer of funds from DBI to any other City department.  Mr. Mather stated that the majority of the Building Inspectors are driving unreliable, ten-year old vehicles and there is a real need for vehicles in the field.  Mr. Mather stated that a vehicle is one of the main tools in the tool crib that the Inspectors use to do their jobs and to get to the sites in a fast and reliable fashion to perform their duties for the public to increase public safety.  Mr. Mather said that the mandatory reduction in fleet has forced some of the Inspectors to drive their own vehicles to do the inspections for the City.  Mr. Mather said that he found this unacceptable even though he personally drives his own vehicle and is willing to do it because he wants to do his job, but said that he finds it undercuts what people in the field expect and what people in the Department would like to see.  Mr. Mather stated that he did not believe that excessive costs paid to Inspectors is necessarily helping the Department, but is actually taking further money away that could be used to do the very things that he has stated.  Mr. Mather thanked the Commission.

Mr. Tom Venizelos said that he was a Building Inspector for the City and County of San Francisco and a member of the San Francisco Building Inspector’s Association.  Mr. Venizelos said that along with his assigned duties as a Building Inspector he is involved with the coordination of continuing education for staff.  Mr. Venizelos stated that he was concerned that the transferring of DBI funds to other departments would have an impact on DBI’s training.  Mr. Venizelos said that the training program informs Plan Check staff and field Inspectors regarding Code updates and new materials and methods of construction; in addition, the training program prepares staff to sit for certification exams.  Mr. Venizelos stated that he had further concerns that the transfer of funds would have the potential to place the Department of Building Inspection in violation of State law because Assembly Bill 717 requires that all Building Inspectors receive forty-five hours during every three year period.  Mr. Venizelos said that Assembly Bill 717 also requires every Building Inspector to maintain in good standing necessary certifications.  Mr. Venizelos said that the Department needs to maintain its training budget, at a minimum, in order to achieve these requirements as mandated by the State of California.  Mr. Venizelos thanked the Commission for their attention to this matter. 

Ms. Yan Yan Chiu introduced himself as the Major/UMB program Manager.  Mr. Chiu thanked the Commission for their continued support to keep the funding within the Department.  Mr. Chiu said that he just wanted to remind the Commission that the Commission has asked the Department to reduce the backlog and currently staff is not allowed to work overtime along with being short staffed.  Mr. Chiu stated that staff is also retiring and said that he hoped the Commission would be successful in keeping the funds for DBI.  Mr. Chiu thanked the Commission.  President Santos asked when was the last time his, Mr. Chiu’s, Division hired an Engineer.  Vice-President Hood said that it has been years and Engineers have retired during that time so the number of Engineers has declined.  Mr. Chiu said that was correct.

Mr. Gary Ho said that he was the Assistant Manger of the Major/UMB Plan Check Division and stated that he was present to speak against the transfer of funds.  Mr. Ho said that as other speakers have said, funds are collected in advance and the money is needed for training and keeping Plan Checkers qualified to do their jobs.  Mr. Ho said that Y.Y. Chiu had mentioned that the Division had lost Plan Check Engineers and so far no experienced Plan Checkers had been hired to do the work required so Mr. Ho said that the funds were needed to fill those vacancies.  President Santos said that Mr. Ho was in charge of the UMB Ordinance implementation and said that in 1993 there were 2,300 buildings that came under that ordinance.  President Santos asked how many brick buildings remained to be structurally upgraded.  Mr. Ho said that he believed that there were still 600 UMB buildings remaining to be upgraded.  President Santos asked how many Engineers were involved in reviewing the plans for these upgrades.  Mr. Ho said that it varies as he had two Engineers that report to him.  President Santos asked what the deadline was for people to comply with that Ordinance.  Mr. Ho said that the final deadline to retrofit all of the buildings is 2006.  President Santos said that there are still about 30% of the buildings that have not been submitted or approved.  Mr. Ho said that there are about 70 buildings that have not submitted plans, but some of the buildings have submitted plans and they are still in the process of being reviewed.  Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to clarify that UMB stood for unreinforced masonry buildings and those are the most hazardous in earthquakes.  President Santos said that it sounded like this Division still had a lot of work to do to bring these buildings into compliance.  Mr. Ho said that this was not an easy task as time is taken for enforcement as well as plan checking.

Mr. Steve Powers said that he was President of the Electrical Inspectors Association and stated that he was also present to talk about the transfer of this money.  Mr. Powers stated that all of the Divisions in the Department of Building Inspection do their jobs and have taken the cutbacks in money, trucks and education and the Department is still getting penalized.  Mr. Powers said that everything the employees do they do for the Building Department and said that he did not know if the Department was coming under scrutiny because it saves money and does its job right.  Mr. Powers stated that the Management watches where the money is going and the employees do their job, but still the City wants to take DBI’s money.  Mr. Powers said that right now the Department is currently under some sort of investigation about Permit Expediters and said that the Department should be under investigation about how to do a job right and should show everyone else in the City how to do the same.  Mr. Powers thanked the Commission.

Mr. Robert Wong introduced himself as the Manger of the Mechanical Plan Check Division and thanked the Commission for their support.  Mr. Wong said that he works in the trenches with his group and said that his group has been working outstandingly and delivering service second to none.  Mr. Wong stated that for years his staff has been working lean, so he was definitely in support of retaining the funds.  Mr. Wong thanked the Commission.

Mr. David Herring introduced himself as President of the Housing Inspectors Association and a member of Local 21 and said that he was opposed to the transfer of funds.  Mr. Herring said that the Department has done everything the City has asked for in cutting back and the fact is that there might be funds in the Department, but there is a lot of need for those funds.  Mr. Herring stated that the cars are in bad shape and cars are falling apart nearly everyday.  Mr. Herring said that there is a strong need for continuing education and training and in his division, Housing Inspection Services, the Division is down three Inspectors that have moved on and those positions need to be replaced.  Mr. Herring stated that the funds really needed to be used by DBI.  Mr. Herring thanked the Commission.

Mr. Tom Estherial said that he was a new Inspector at DBI in the complaint’s division.  Mr. Estherial said that he had one-half of San Francisco, was driving his own vehicle, did not have a cell phone from the Department and did not have business cards.  Mr. Estherial said that he was actually running around this morning looking for some pens so basically the Department needs the money.  Mr. Estherial stated that he was out there trying to generate some revenue, not trying to beat up on anybody, but trying to get people to comply with the Codes and to get permits so it would nice to have some business cards, a cell phone and a vehicle.  Mr. Estherial thanked the Commission for their time.  President Santos asked how long Mr. Estherial had been with the this assignment.  Mr. Estherial said that it has been about a month that he is with the complaint investigation team.  Mr. Estherial said that he was feeding the meters; was worried about tickets so it was taking longer to park and then he has to fill out the forms to claim the expenses for driving his own vehicle.  Mr. Estherial said that the Department was paying for the use of his vehicle and for documenting that time; then someone has to look at that documentation so it is going through three or four hands.  Mr. Estherial stated that he has been driving his own vehicle for three or four months and had still not received any funds.

Mr. Steve Hajnal introduced himself as Vice-President of the San Francisco Building Inspector’s Association and said that he was a Building Inspector who works in a Plan Check Division.  Mr. Hajnal said that he wanted to express his objection to the transfer of funds primarily because it affects the staffing levels in the Department.  Mr. Hajnal said that as it is right now, the Department is already shorthanded, with a tremendous backlog.  Mr. Hajnal stated that he makes up the Residential Counter Schedule and has to assign people to the counter.  Mr. Hajnal stated that he gets a personal, up close look at how much time the Inspectors spend at the counter and it is a great deal of man hours.  Mr. Hajnal said that this prevents the staff from doing their primary job as Plan Checkers, as five hours a day twice a week is a severe impact on Plan Checking time, not to mention that because so much time is spent at the counter it creates a heavy backlog.  Mr. Hajnal said that then there are a lot of people calling asking when staff is going to get to their projects.  Mr. Hajnal stated that he personally had about 30 projects in his backlog right now and when somebody calls he does not know one job from the other and has to take the time to research what project the customer is talking about before he calls them back.  Mr. Hajnal said that he could easily spend one to two hours a day on those phone calls and this is not productive.  President Santos asked if Mr. Hajnal informed the customer about checking their applications online.  Mr. Hajnal said that the customer can track it online, but they still call the Plan Checker for status.  Vice-President Hood said that online the customer can only check who it went to, but can’t tell what is happening with the person that has the plans.  Vice-President Hood said that her work volume has greatly increased and stated that she has been hiring staff so there is an upswing again in construction activity.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that when the Commission goes into Closed Session on this issue, he hoped that despite the advice which would probably be given from the City Attorney’s Office that the Department can’t sue, that the Commission ignore that advice.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that at best, or at worst, this Department should go to the courts and ask if this Department has the right to hire an independent legal counsel.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that his position is that DBI and the BIC have that right.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that in looking at the consequences of this money transfer, which is illegal, what it really means is not just layoffs or not just bankrupting a fiscally responsible Department, but it means that the thousands of people out there, small property owners and small businesses that are getting excellent service from this Department because of the creation of this Commission, will not be getting that service.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that it would also mean that there would be less inspections and said that this makes no sense especially in looking at who DBI is being asked to transfer the monies to, to the long-range planning division of Planning.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department is being asked for these layoffs and the consequences to the public so that long-range Planners can look more into space and into the future.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the results of that space gazing has already been seen from 1978 to 1986 when they had the largest budgets of any department in this City and can see the affects of the long term planning in the incredible housing shortage that exists in San Francisco today.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Planning is no more bankrupt now than they were in the past and it is ridiculous what the Mayor’s Office is now asking DBI to do.  Mr. O’Donoghue said one of the reasons the Residential Builders supported Matt Gonzalez was because it was “us” versus “them”, the “them” being the Chamber of Commerce, SPUR and the Committee on jobs which is a euphemism; the Committee on Jobs has no interest in the working man.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that these organizations want to take the money that would benefit the downtown people versus the small property owner and this is the issue.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Mayor Newsom advocates and carries the water pail of those money interests and those big money interest groups want to put this Department into bankruptcy as they were the same groups that opposed the creation of this Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that SPUR in the ‘50’s and ‘60’s were the ones who resulted in demolition all over this City and eliminated all of the SRO’s so now the City has the homeless problem that it is faced with.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that these long-range Planners wouldn’t know a two-by-four from a two-by-six and have never gone up on a roof to frame joists or stuff like that, but they are thinkers and as far as he is concerned it is time for them to go to Colma and do the thinking in the life here after.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that maybe they could recreate the world if there is such a thing going to happen in the future because these are the thinkers that result in devastation all over this world and in this City the problem begins right here.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Department and the Commission should take action this morning and vote regardless of the legal advice, which they get and go forward to prosecute, defend and sue.  Mr. O’Donoghue thanked the Commission.

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that he wanted to thank the Commission as he did at the last meeting for their backbone in looking at this issue and for standing up for the employees.  Mr. Hutchinson said that he has seen a lot of Commissions, but had never seen anything like this and said he really appreciates it.  Mr. Hutchinson said that he was proud of the employees and said that the BIC had seen a lot of people who care about what they do and who are honest and hardworking.  Mr. Hutchinson stated that he did not think that in any other department there would be so many people who were concerned about the resources and have come up with common sense measures to make sure the money is spent efficiently.  Mr. Hutchinson said that contrary to what the Department hears, less is not more, and said that he could not walk into Plum Jack’s with $5 and get a $50 lunch as it doesn’t work that way.  Mr. Hutchinson stated that the monies that DBI has is needed for the services that the people expect from the Department.  Mr. Hutchinson thanked the Commission for standing up for the Department.

Ms. Alice Barkley said that she wanted to point out a couple of things about the impact on the public, the smaller builders not the larger builders.  Ms. Barkley said that DBI needs to staff up now because what is happening is what Inspector Sweeney talked about where the Department collects funds for work to be done in the future.  Ms. Barkley stated that right now on a small, wood framed, four-story building, people go in with twenty units and go to the Department with a site permit.  Ms. Barkley said that the addendum process is so slow that jobs have to be stopped in order to wait for the Plan Checkers to finish the addenda so that they can continue because they are not supposed to work without the approved addenda.  Ms. Barkley said in looking at the Plan Check Division, on a small residential building it is taking six to eight weeks to go through mechanical and this is in San Francisco where there is not even air conditioning.  Ms. Barkley stated that the Department is severely behind and is not able to get out a simple site permit and it is taking a couple of months to get that simple Plan Check out.  Ms. Barkley said that the Department is not in the position to give up a single dollar and if anything the Department needs to staff up by cutting into the reserve it has to make sure that the backlog is dealt with quickly and efficiently.

Assistant Director Amy Lee said that she wanted to speak as an employee.  Ms. Lee said that back in 2001/2002 the Department made a slight increase to the Central Permit fees and at that time in looking at the televised hearings of the Finance Committee the Department was saying that there was going to be a slowdown in the economy until 2004/2005 and that in 2004/2005 there would be a slight upswing.  Ms. Lee said that this was consistent with what Commissioner Hood had stated.  Ms. Lee said that the Department said this knowing that the years between 2002 and 2004 would be slow years.  Ms. Lee said that as a result the Department and the Commission cut back on DBI’s budget and had been running a skeletal budget for the past three years.  Ms. Lee stated that as many people have said the Department does not have sufficient staffing to take care of the backlog or the resources.  Ms. Lee said that hopefully, the Department was looking at growth in 2005/2006, but never to the times of the revenues of the dot.com era.  Ms. Lee stated that this transfer would hinder the Department in its basic operations and ongoing improvements.  Ms. Lee said that there a lot of things that need to be fixed at DBI and said that she suspected that the Special Monitor would have a lot of recommendations for things to fixed and these recommendations will cost money.  Ms. Lee reported that the Department is not getting approval to do a lot of remodeling that DBI needs to do as the Plan Checkers are working on top of each other.  Ms. Lee said that she wanted to urge the Commissioners to think closely about what is going to happen with this Department.  Ms. Lee stated, that with that being said, she used to work in the Mayor’s Budget Office and said that she totally understood and appreciated the City’s need to plug in the dollars where they are needed and transferring money into other departments.  Ms. Lee said that the PUC with the recent Bond Measure have been a source of money for many years and now they are at a new bond time and have been criticized for not doing a lot of the things they were supposed to be doing.  Ms. Lee said that she did not want DBI to be in a similar position as she felt that the employees are working very hard at DBI and have been constantly scrutinized and attacked.  Ms. Lee stated that Management is constantly working to put out fires instead of proactively for the future or doing their jobs the way they should be or the way they want to do it.  Ms. Lee said that she thought it was important for the Mayor and the City to know that DBI is trying to do everything possible and if the Department was given the resources and the authority to do everything with personnel and whatever then sure if there is left over money then DBI would be happy to share it, but DBI is at the point where it doesn’t have enough money in the first place. Ms. Lee reported that DBI only has a $3M surplus right now as the surplus has been used for the past three years.  Ms. Lee said that this was just some food for thought. 

President Santos asked Ms. Lee about her comment about there being an upswing in business.  Ms. Lee said that yes, there was a slight upswing.  President Santos asked if this was in residential or was it commercial.  Ms. Lee said that it was in general building permits.  Ms. Lee said that City Hall should realize that as DBI gets the permits done faster there will be additional revenue to the City because there will be higher taxes; for instance, the faster DBI helps to get Bloomingdales built it will mean jobs and more resources for the City.  Ms. Lee stated that she did not think that people realized the impact DBI has on the economy of the City because it is such a little Department, but it has a big impact in the City.  Vice-President Hood said that Ms. Lee was making a great point because construction is the economic engine of this City and a cut to DBI that prevents it from processing permits quickly enough is a cut in the overall revenues in the overall revenues to the City of San Francisco.  Vice-President Hood said that this is just stupid long-range planning and DBI is trying to do intelligent planning.  Ms. Lee said that she thought there was an opportunity for DBI to receive all of the appropriate revenue expenditures that it needs to operate the Department and DBI could assist Planning in the sense that Planning could assist DBI and the construction industry in general.  Ms. Lee stated that she did not feel that the Department was given the opportunity to make those kinds of deals or resolutions and perhaps this is something that could be explored. 

Mr. Hanson Tom, Manager of the Plan Check Program said that he wanted to give the Commission a little description of how the Plan Check Program has evolved over the past few years.  Mr. Tom said that the program has expanded from one counter service to three counters of service, Residential, Commercial and Mechanical.  Mr. Tom stated that the counter service demands a lot of personnel to service the counter yet, 80% of the residential permits were approved over the counter and 50% were approved in commercial plan check.  Mr. Tom said that there is an MBO goal so in residential a Plan Checker has to check five or six permits per day and for major projects it is two permits per day, which is really excessive in talking about approval.  Mr. Tom stated that the Code is getting more complicated with UMB programs and mechanical plan check has gotten more complicated because a lot of life safety items have become performance design now.  Mr. Tom stated that when he came to the Department seventeen years ago, for five years there were hardly any high rise buildings, but during the last five or six years hundreds of high rises have been approved over the past few years.  Mr. Tom said that a lot of the high rises are not a Code prescriptive design; it always goes to alternative or performance design that demands a lot of staff time.  Mr. Tom said that it really makes no sense to take away DBI’s funding as more Plan Check staff should be hired and also more Field Inspectors.  Mr. Tom said that DBI has used sound fiscal policies and has not wasted a lot of money.  Mr. Tom said that he wanted the Commission to support the staff to make sure that the funding stays with DBI.

President Santos asked if there was anyone present from the Mayor’s Office to comment on this item.  There was no one present.

 

 

b.   Possible action to convene to Closed Session. 

President Santos made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Hood to move to Closed Session.  The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 031-004

The Commission went into Closed Session at 10:00 a.m.


c.   CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL

Discussion of potential litigation concerning the proposed transfer of funds under the budget from the Department of Building Inspection to other City departments.


d.   Reconvene in Open Session to vote whether to disclose any or all discussions held in Closed Session (Administrative Code Section 67.12.)

The Commission reconvened into Open Session at 10:42 a.m.

President Santos made a motion, seconded by Vice-President Hood to disclose the discussion held in closed Session.  The motion carried unanimously.

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 032-004

President Santos said that he was asked to summarize the discussion held in Closed Session and asked the other Commissioners to join in if they had anything to add.  President Santos stated that the Commission wanted to make sure that DBI staff and Management understood that the Commissioners appreciated all of the comments made regarding this issue. President Santos said that the Commission felt that from the comments made the Commission felt that it was not only crucial to keep all of DBI’s staff, but to hire additional DBI staff, such as Engineers and Inspectors and people who can help with the backlog and also to implement the Building Code which is crucial for the City.  President Santos stated that the BIC is absolutely against the intent of the Budget Office to take the money from DBI.  President Santos said that the Commission was now contemplating requesting, in writing, from the City Attorney their interpretation and their stand as to what constitutes the proper expenditure of the monies that DBI has so capably earned.  President Santos reported that the Deputy City Attorney stated that their legal opinion at this point might not be in line with the position of the Commissioners as far as what the Commissioners feel is their right as well as the citizens.  President Santos said that there were Architects and Engineers on the Commission and according to their Code of Ethics it was their obligation to make sure that life safety issues are met and dealt with properly and in a timely fashion.  President Santos said that the Commission will require the City Attorney to give a written response to the BIC’s inquiry and the City Attorney’s Office has agreed to do that very quickly.  President Santos said that the Commission also wanted a description of what constitutes a proper use of DBI’s funding.  President Santos reported that based on some conversation with the City Attorney according to the City Attorney anything that is relating to the permit processing, whether it is Planning or Fire, anything of that nature is a valid use of DBI’s budget.  Vice-President Hood said that this included long-range planning in the Planning Department.  President Santos stated that the Commission strongly disagreed with that because the BIC believes that the money should be for specific uses, one of them being planning review or direct plan checking as opposed to long-range planning.   President Santos said that there is some conflicting information that the BIC believes to be reality and legal and what the City Attorney’s perception is regarding the use of DBI funding.  President Santos said that the City Attorney has agreed to give the BIC their opinion in writing as regards to this issue. 

Vice-President Hood said that another issue was the overriding concern she had when this issue came up a year ago and the Department received an opinion from the City Attorney was to her personally as a Commissioner and an Architect is that her reading of the State law and the City Ordinance were contrary to the conclusion of the City Attorney and their advice to DBI and the BIC.  Vice-President Hood said that she was concerned about the concept of a nexus, as a nexus is kind of an umbrella that supposedly covers all aspects of Planning and Building and everything else that the City Planning Office might choose to do regardless of what it is.  Vice-President Hood said that this would include the money that is collected to enforce the Building Code and to make sure that plans submitted follow the Building Code and life safety, fire issues and all of the other things could be used instead for things that are purely aesthetic or perceptual or have to do with matters of what one simply wants the City to look like as opposed to matters of life safety.  Vice-President Hood said that there were positions on this Commission, a Structural Engineer, an Architect, a Building Contractor which are licensed professions and as part of that licensing process these individuals have to uphold the Building Code and cannot do anything that would suggest that there should be lack of enforcement of the Building Code.  Vice-President Hood stated that she was very concerned about that because as she sat here today she learned even more from the Building Inspectors who spoke that they feel that they are already understaffed.  Vice-President Hood said that for the past three years the Mayor’s Office has turned down the positions that the Department wanted to fill, empty spots of people who had retired, left or passed away, the Department was not even able to replace those people, so now there is a tremendous backlog that is only getting worse.  Vice-President Hood said that a study was done to show that it is much cheaper for the City to buy cars and let people drive City cars to their inspections than it is to reimburse the people who are driving their own cars.  Vice-President Hood said that the Department gets more use out of an Inspector if they have a cell phone and can be called to visit a site in their area to save two trips.  Vice-President Hood said that the Commission believe that things have already happened that diminishes the ability of this Department to effectively review plans to verify their enforcement of following the Building Codes and secondly the Inspectors are not performing as frequently as they should.  Vice-President Hood stated that things might occur in the building process that might constitute a life safety problem.

Vice-President Hood said that the Commission heard in Closed Session from the City Attorney that it is the belief of the Mayor’s Budget Analyst that the Building Department has approved all of the budgets for the past several years that the Mayor’s Office came up with.  Vice-President Hood stated that this is a misunderstanding as the Commission did not approve those; the budgets that the Commission approved and wanted were those that were sent over to the Mayor’s Office and those had already been cut down so what is regarded as a surplus now, the Commission and the Department thought was needed to do the basic job.  Vice-President Hood stated that in Closed Session the City Attorney compared City Planning’s long-range planning to the Building Code development and the Building Code being written.  Vice-President Hood stated that she pointed out that there was no comparison because Building Codes now days are written by the State, the Federal Organizations and International Organizations.  Vice-President Hood said that DBI is given these Codes every three years by entities outside of San Francisco and are required by law to enforce them as professionals, as a Commission and as a Department.  Vice-President Hood said that the Department has no choice about what it has to enforce and has to rely on those people who are writing the Codes and using all sorts of information to believe that those are what are necessary to have safe buildings in an earthquake zone.  Vice-President Hood said that the Commission even heard about such things as the importance of inspecting mechanical installations in the trenches on a job site in the greatly increasing high-rise buildings in the City.  Vice-President Hood said that high-rise buildings are inherently more dangerous than low-rise buildings because of the difficulty of getting people out in an emergency as was seen at the World Trade Center.  Vice-President Hood said that in this case fire becomes a major consideration because if there are not connections in gas lines or electrical lines that can tolerate the movement of an earthquake it can create a very hazardous situation that leads to rapid fire in a time when emergency vehicles have trouble reaching a site.

Vice-President Hood said that another thing that came up that for her was a real concern was that she felt that the City Attorney, and this is in no way a criticism of the City Attorney, represents the City and represents the Mayor’s Office and the City Attorney’s that work in that office serve at the pleasure of the Mayor’s Office and the Board of Supervisors.  Vice-President Hood said that the opinion that the Commission received regarding this nexus concept was a stretch to cover what her reading is of the law.  Vice-President Hood said that she felt that the City Attorney has been placed in a difficult situation where in order to fulfill her role in providing advice to the City is in this particular instance in conflict with the kind of advice that this Commission is seeking.  Vice-President Hood said that one of the most important thing that the Commission asked the City Attorney to do and to respond to in writing was the ability to hire outside legal consulting for this very reason as the Commission thinks there is a conflict with the City Attorney’s Office.  Vice-President Hood said that the Commission suspects that this might be turned down, nevertheless the Commission wants this in writing to make the effort.

President Santos said that Commissioner D’Anne made a very good point regarding the economic impact of bankrupting DBI.  President Santos said that DBI was probably the only Department that generated revenue in the last fiscal year and if anything, this is a lifeline for the economic strength in the City.  President Santos said that if DBI’s tools were going to be taken away it would be devastating for the entire City given the fact that DBI is the one generating funds.  President Santos said that Commissioner D’Anne suggested that maybe someone could do a quick economic analysis of what would happen if DBI does not have the ability to perform the duties that the citizens have paid for. 

Vice-President Hood said that Director Chiu pointed out the DBI is working on its Information Systems and that request has now been turned down by the Mayor and this is another dangerous thing to do.   Vice-President Hood said that many things could happen that would come back to haunt DBI because money is going to taken away from DBI to do long-range planning.  Vice-President Hood said that she wanted the Mayor to have a successful City and balance the budget, but said she had an obligation to do the right thing as a Commissioner.

President Santos asked for public comment.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that it was put into the record this morning, evidence from the Inspectors, the people who know exactly what is happening to the requests for approvals, inspections and also enforcement that this Department is presently being fiscally impacted by the policies which are emanating from the Mayor’s Office.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that more importantly staff gave evidence as to how this Department would wind up in bankruptcy with a real serious deterioration of service to the thousands of people out there, small homeowners and small businesses as a result of that impact.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Commission should direct this Director, because somehow or other he always seems reluctant to carry out what is fiscally good for this Department; direct him to prepare a report as apparently Commissioner Denise D’Anne requested, that would categorize the economic impact of what was discussed.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department needs that because there is going to be a lawsuit, no question about it, and rather than waste time and slow the Department down further in terms of depositions, this report would help to eliminate and obviate the delays that will occur from these depositions.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department should be preparing for the case because it will happen because as he speaks a large, downtown law firm has been retained, and it is in fact investigating and coming to conclusions about the questions that are already out there, which not surprisingly he knew the City Attorney’s Office would tell the Commission that the Department has no right to hold onto its money and it can go to some way out nexus of long-range planning.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that asking the City Attorney’s Office for advice is like asking the fox to guard the chicken coop and that is the reality.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this is all politics, no question about it and politics are being dictated to by SPUR, the Chamber of Commerce, the Committee on Jobs and their spokesperson happens to be Gavin Newsom.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that while this City might be run right now by headlines in the Chronicle and the glitter from campaign fundraising in tinsel land, meanwhile the nuts and bolts that made the City a great success have already been endangered.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this Commission, which is a can do, action Commission needs to direct the Director to prepare this report and not come back with some gobbledy-goop.  Mr. O’Donoghue thanked the Commission.

Ms. Alice Barkley said that one of the problems is that DBI is a fee for service Department and if there is so much extra money that it can be given away to another department the implication is that DBI has overcharged its customers.  Ms. Barkley said that in that instance Joe is correct; someone can come in with a class action suit and demand refunds.  Ms. Barkley stated that this money should be going to provide adequate service to the public and the fees can not be taken and made into a General Fund tax; that is illegal.

Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to say something about the word nexus.    Vice-President Hood said that to Buck Delventhal and Judy Boyajian who wrote the opinion nexus probably has some legal meaning, but to her as a former English major and Architect it is vague and ambiguous in the legal sense.  Vice-President Hood said that following up on Ms. Barkley’s comments she asked what it meant because in a way everything in the world could involve permitting and it could be stretched to mean anything.  Vice-President Hood said that she could not see how the Department could collect a fee to do a remodeling job on a house in the Sunset and expect it to go for long-range planning of downtown buildings on Rincon Hill.  Vice-President Hood said that if all of those little fees were broken down individually in detail, the nexus would go away because nexus is just this sort of strange term that she never heard of before and didn’t understand that DBI was under a nexus.  Vice-President Hood said that the only context she heard nexus used in before was in Jacobean plays in which nexus was always a very bad thing and was something under the control of the devil and not God.

 

5.

Discussion and possible action regarding 4109 Irving Street and update on 5/20/04 site visit by Commissioner Guinnane.   [Commissioner Guinnane]

Commissioner Guinnane reported that on 5/20/04 he, Frank Chiu, Jim Hutchinson and Wing Lau were out to look at the house at 4109 Irving Street.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at the condition of the house as it stands today, the individual out there should be granted a demolition permit, however the Commission nor the Department have the authority to grant that permit.  Commissioner Guinnane stated the issue was that everyone be on the same playing field regarding DRs (Discretionary Reviews) or demolitions and other people trying to get around the law.  Commissioner Guinnane said that there was representation made to this Department from the Engineers that there was rebar in the old walls out there, but in looking at the foundation, the foundation looks good on the east side, but is crumbing on the west side.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that the sections of concrete that were broken apart in three and four foot sections, there was no rebar observed in any of the walls, not even little rebars as the Manager had maintained to the Department.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this was the issue at this site. 

Director Chiu said that one of the other reasons the Department went out was to make sure that the project sponsor was not exceeding the approved plan and it appears that they are within the plan that the Department approved.  Director Chiu said that there are some concerns about the foundation and the Department is dealing with that and the project sponsor has been asked to submit a new set of plans.  Director Chiu stated that it was his understanding that the project sponsor was now applying for a demolition permit and plan to build a new building, but those plans are probably with the Planning Department.  Director Chiu said that it is a small structure, but there was some concern about the structural integrity of the building due to dry rot or termites. Director Chiu said that as of today, the project sponsor is still within the approved guidelines.  Director Chiu stated that the Department was strongly urging that the project sponsor submits proper permits to deal with all of the concerns.  President Santos asked if the project sponsor had applied for the permit yet.  Director Chiu said that he had not looked at the system to see if it was filed.

Commissioner Guinnane said that in following up with 4109 Irving there was a meeting on May 26th between himself, Rodrigo Santos, Hanson Tom and William Wong.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he was basically telling Hanson Tom that there was no rebar in the foundation that he maintained was there because Hanson was not out at the actual site inspection.  Commissioner Guinnane said that in talking with Hanson Tom there was a discussion about this and Hanson tried to tell Commissioner Guinnane that he had uncovered the 4109 Irving Street job site with no rebar in it.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he told Hanson Tom that was a boldfaced lie because it was this Commission that actually brought that up.  Commissioner Guinnane said that at that time there was some discussion as to what Mr. Tom was doing as the Manager of that division to remedy the ongoing problem and he basically said that the Department was looking at each job on a case-by-case basis.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he told Mr. Tom that he should immediately being doing x-rays on the old walls or some sort of a core sample to justify using the old foundation.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Director Chiu should be giving these instructions to staff.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he asked Mr. Tom to go back to the Building Department and look in the bin of jobs being approved, for horizontal and vertical additions, to see if any other Engineers were following the same pattern and said he did not know if Mr. Tom could respond to that today or not.

Mr. Hanson Tom said that since the last meeting he went back to the office and checked the meeting minutes that Commissioner Guinnane said Mr. Tom claimed that there was rebar in 4109 Irving Street.  Mr. Tom stated that he wanted to read the minutes so the Commission could understand exactly what he had stated.  Mr. Tom said that it was the regular meeting of April 5, 2004, page 8 and read the following from the meeting notes: “Mr. Tom stated that if there is an existing structure of only one-story and two stories are being added on above the Department would really have to look at the foundation system.  Mr. Tom said that from his understanding in looking at the drawings these drawing show that the foundation has some reinforcement in there.” Mr. Tom said that when he referred to that it was regarding the new section that was added into the existing foundation. “Mr. Tom said that he felt that the foundation system really was not adequate so he asked them how it was possible that this foundation system would be able to transfer the force.  Mr. Tom stated that since the Department is looking at this foundation much more carefully to make sure about the load being transferred to the foundations.  Mr. Tom said that as far as how many projects had been done this way he would have no idea and said that he hoped it was not that many because every Engineer should be responsible for the structural design of the system.”  Mr. Tom said that this is what he had said at the meeting so definitely when he said that reinforcement was there it was only for the new reinforcing that added to the existing system.  Commissioner Guinnane said that when 4109 came up originally there was a question put to Mr. Tom about the actual foundation detail and Mr. Tom was asked if this was an isolated incident and Mr. Tom assured this Commission that it was isolated and an Engineer from Technical Services was the one who approved that.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that Mr. Tom said that Mr. Tom went back and gave that Engineer hell for doing that and talked to the other Engineers not to approve this.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this is what Mr. Tom said at the Commission and said that Mr. Tom also said that there was rebar in there and then there was some discussion about the size and Mr. Tom said it was little rebar in there.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that when he went out to 4109 there was no rebar of any kind in there except for a piece of ½” water line that was in there and Director Chiu was out there with him.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the other question he had asked Mr. Tom was if he had gone back and looked at the bin on other jobs by other Engineers to see if this is an ongoing pattern other than James Li projects.  Mr. Tom said that when he went back he had a meeting with the Residential Plan Check Division because they process most of the residential additions.  Mr. Tom said that he told them that from now on he wanted all residential, vertical permits to be quality controlled so when the Engineers approve the permits he wants them to be sent to Y.Y. Chiu to oversee that to make sure that the foundation system approved by DBI staff is reviewed.  Mr. Tom gave a copy of a memo to staff to the Commission outlining those conditions and asking for more data on vertical and horizontal additions.  Mr. Tom stated that hopefully in a week or two he would have more data to see how many permits are on hold in the permit process.

Commissioner Guinnane said that what is now happening is that everyone is suffering because of this issue and said that he told Mr. Tom to go back himself and just do a random check to pull a set of drawings and look at the foundation detail; not to transfer it over to Major Plan Check to create a backlog.  Mr. Tom said that he told his staff that personally he wanted to take a look at those plans that are on hold to see what sort of foundation system they had.  Mr. Tom stated that he did not want to create any more of a backlog than already exists, but said that he would like to uncloud the questions that the Commission has about DBI Engineers approving substandard permits so that is his main purpose.  Mr. Tom said that he would be doing this for a short time only.

President Santos said that he was happy to hear that Hanson was taking a personal interest in this because it is his division that is going to have to be at the Commission podium answering these questions.  President Santos stated that he has worked with Mr. Tom for several years and had no doubts of his confidence as a Structural Engineer.  President Santos said that the request that was made was not intended to create a backlog, as this would be counterproductive.  President Santos said that the sooner that Mr. Tom could get a sense of the pattern of a foundation upgrade as it relates to vertical additions, the better and the sooner the Department could move on.  President Santos said that he thought that Commissioner Guinnane was absolutely right in his concerns about the strength concrete because right now the Code says that if there is a visual investigation that is sufficient and the Structural Engineer signs off on the condition of the footing the City only gets the information from the graphical documentation that is presented.  President Santos said that the strength of the concrete is an important guideline and said that his suggestion would be 2,000 lbs. psi.  President Santos said that this needs to be done as quickly as possible so people do not get the sense that this is going in the opposite direction to freeze the application process and everyone get penalized for that, which is not the intent of the Commission.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the original request was for Mr. Tom to take a random testing himself.

Commissioner Guinnane asked what progress Mr. Tom had made on the James Li jobs and said that he had given Mr. Tom two addresses that were not on the Department’s list and said that at that time he had eight more and now had twenty more.  Mr. Tom said that the Department had queried the computer and when he asked MIS to do this request the Department used James Li, James Li, P.E., Mayfair International, Mayfair International Company, Mayfair International Inc., James King Li, James King Li, P.E. or J.C. Lee and Associates.  Mr. Tom said that the request was for James Li’s projects based on these queries and said that he received a report for the past five years showing about 2,000 permits.  Mr. Tom stated that these were not all of Mr. Li’s projects because in looking at the report many of the items belonged to 50 California, 555 California and One Market.  Mr. Tom said that he asked James Li if those were his projects and Mr. Li said that they were not his projects.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Mr. Tom told him that the other projects that Commissioner Guinnane had were under a different name and said that the list that Mr. Tom put before the Commission and the other jobs that Commissioner Guinnane had they are not under a fake or fictitious name, they are under Mayfair International, so Commissioner Guinnane said that he could not figure out how when he queries the computer he comes up with a different list than Mr. Tom.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he believed that these jobs were left off of the list for some reason.  Mr. Tom said that he wanted to make it clear that there was no hidden agenda.  Mr. Tom said the Department produced what it had and previously there were fourteen projects that the Department was looking at and now there are at least fifty so he has to get all of the prints on those 50 to see what kind of foundation systems were on those permits.  Mr. Tom stated that he wanted the Commission to know that this is a daunting task and is not a simple task to ask the computer.  Mr. Tom said that he wished that Commissioner Guinnane would give him the list so that he could look at those permits immediately.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he would give the addresses to Mr. Tom once Mr. Tom gave him the list that he promised.  Commissioner Guinnane said that three weeks had gone by since they met and Mr. Tom was going to go back and check the bin.  Commissioner Guinnane asked if Mr. Tom had done that to see if any other Engineers are doing the same thing.  Mr. Tom said that he was looking at new foundations and said that he would report about the James Li stuff in about three weeks.  Commissioner Guinnane said to throw the James Li stuff out the window for now and stated that he was looking to see if there were other Engineers doing the same kind of detail for vertical or horizontal additions and asked if Mr. Tom had seen any of this kind of activity.  Mr. Tom said he had not seen anything yet.  Commissioner Guinnane asked how many plans Mr. Tom had looked at in the past three weeks.  Mr. Tom said that he told his staff to get him the list last week and said that he is gradually getting the list of vertical permits so essentially he only looked at only one or two.  Mr. Tom said that one or two is not a good sample and said that he would look at more.

Commissioner Guinnane gave Mr. Tom an address at 788 Victoria, which is being done by Dixon Engineering, also known as John Lau.  Commissioner Guinnane said that the Engineer shows battered walls at the address and shows a rebar detail in the old walls.  Commissioner Guinnane asked how somebody could show that detail without samples or no x-ray.  Commissioner Guinnane asked Mr. Tom to explain this to him.  Mr. Tom said that he would have to take a look at this project.  Mr. Tom said that he agreed that Commissioner Guinnane had very good input on the strength of concrete and said that he had talked to the Structural Sub-committee regarding when a core sample is required.  Mr. Tom said that the discussion was about every building being core sampled where maybe half of the foundation is pretty good already, is it necessary to have everyone do a core sample.  Mr. Tom stated that it might be better to have every Engineer when they stamp the drawings he should include a statement that the Engineer has already visualized the concrete and feels that it is not necessary to do a core sample so this would not subject everyone to do a core sample.  President Santos said that to take a sample and test it, it is about $150 - $160 so it is not a substantial amount of money, but the question comes up whether to do as in a UMB to do two per wall per floor or one in each corner.  Vice-President Hood said that what the Commission should be looking at here is the right procedures because it is very difficult in the context of this Commission to review people’s drawings or their projects.  Vice-President Hood said that the Commission is not really an investigative agency and perhaps the Commission might need to look for outside help.  Vice-President Hood said that she did not understand the Commission investigating very specific application of Plan Checking and said that she was a little uncomfortable about this.

Commissioner Guinnane said that he was not at all uncomfortable because in looking at the jobs that were approved and now there is a three-story building on top of an old foundation and looking at the actual load and the way it goes down if there is no rebar in there then what happens in a quake.  Commissioner Guinnane said that his concern is that there are buildings that were approved without adequate foundations and what is the Department’s position if there is an earthquake and one of these buildings comes down.

Mr. Tom said that he thought that the Department still has to collect some data and said that some Engineers have some proposals about how to reinforce existing foundations and the Department has to make some judgment as to how good those details are.  Mr. Tom said that he thought that if there was an existing foundation that encapsulates the existing concrete foundation, he felt that this situation would be a very good detail.  Mr. Tom said that is someone is just drilling in some dowels, a dowel every four of five feet in the center; the Department really has to worry about the adequacy of the reinforcements of the new section.  Commissioner Guinnane said this is exactly what he has been talking about.  Mr. Tom said that right now the Commission had instructed him to take a look at those vertical additions and he began to get the information to sit down and really take a look at it and said he would like to involve Commissioner Santos.  Commissioner Santos said that he would be happy to work with Mr. Tom and give him any assistance that he would need.  Commissioner Santos said that this should be more of a policy issue.  Vice-President Hood said that she wanted the product of this to be a rule that everybody could apply, but did not want to get bottlenecks created where only one person knows the rule. 

Commissioner Guinnane said that his concern is that 4109 (Irving) has been around now for several months and asked why it takes so long to come up with a new format for these foundations.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this was just going around in circles; Mr. Tom is the Manager and should implement new procedures immediately for the ongoing ones going out instead of creating more problems on down the road.  Mr. Tom said that on April 23rd he sent out guidelines for his staff about requesting information on the vertical additions.  Mr. Tom gave a copy of this letter to the Commission.  Vice-President Hood said that if there was a rule that said unless a project sponsor had physical proof that the existing wall had certain strength or certain reinforcement then the Department should assume that it had no strength or no reinforcement and the new wall that is supplied outside must support all of the vertical and horizontal loads.  Vice-President Hood said that this was the kind of rule that she could see coming out of this investigation and process and would put the proof on the property owner or project sponsor.  Mr. Tom said that when the Engineer of record stamps the drawings he is responsible for that information and DBI Engineers can only verify what the Engineer submits.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he thought that the City has a certain amount of responsibility here and even though he is not an Engineer he could tell from the drawings that the foundation did not qualify so he did not know how somebody could sign it out.

President Santos asked how long the meeting could go on.  Secretary Aherne said that the meeting could continue until 2:00 p.m.

President Santos asked for any public comment on Item #5.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that the testimony that was given, with all due respects to the representative of DBI, was deflecting the real question. Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the real question should be how many of the plans that were already approved under James Li have inadequate foundations.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that no one had to be an Einstein because Commissioner Guinnane had already done his research as a lone individual and if Commissioner Guinnane already found defective plans and foundations on plans that were approved for James Li, surely Hanson Tom with a whole cadre of Engineers could at least come up with Commissioner Guinnane’s research.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that, instead there was testimony from Hanson Tom today where there are 240 James Li’s plans out there and through the process of elimination the high rises could be eliminated because James Li is into residential building.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that what the Commission got was deflection by a bureaucrat who is trying to cover up what was obviously wrong approvals given that anyone with a basic knowledge of engineering and foundations for plans that have lead to abuse within the system which is now endangering lives.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that the Commission needed to proceed strictly on that, but instead now the Commission has got caught up in the wrap of coming up with ways to stop what already has been approved assuming that there are all James Li’s out in the engineering field.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that in the remodeling field anytime he bought an old building and was adding on to it he took out the old foundation.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that this is a rule of thumb in the construction industry that you never try to put a new foundation into an old foundation as that sends up a red flag immediately.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that what they did within the system here, the abusers, was to use this methodology which is the exception to what is practiced in the field by responsible contractors to get rapid approval for “defacto” demolitions.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that it is clear that this is where the wrong was, period, so there should be a standard policy that was alluded to, that all old buildings when they are being remodeled with a new foundation has to have the new foundation throughout.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the contractor simply raises the building and this is a no brainer; it is a simple process.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that instead the Commission has Hanson Tom giving different recommendations and he is not talking about the scofflaw policies that have put many, many people, who are buyers without knowledge, in serious jeopardy for their families.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that Commissioner Guinnane needs to get back on track to put this train back on the track that this Commission started out with, not on the agenda which Hanson Tom is diverting and deflecting from the real question as to what has been approved and why.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Mr. Tom has already issued to the entire construction industry new policies, that Mr. O’Donoghue has heard about from non-members of the RBA, and these new policies are now driving them nuts with requests that are unnecessary, but is costly to them.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the scofflaws who abuse the system now have deflected the hardships onto the rest of the industry and policies are now coming down from the Director on down, who refuses to act on the basis that if the Department acts it might come before this Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the Department is putting good people through the torture chamber.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this is why this Commission was originally designated and created because Larry Litchfield, the former Director, was doing what this current Director is doing and that is putting hardship on good people.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he wished that Commissioner Guinnane would get back on track on this one and thanked the Commission.

Commissioner Guinnane said that in going back and looking at the jobs that were submitted by Hanson and then James Li was in front of the Commission and Commissioner Guinnane asked him how many people worked in his office; Mr. Li said it was three.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he asked Mr. Li if one individual did the wood frame and another did the foundation and Mr. Li said that one individual does it all.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he asked Mr. Li about the detail that he puts in for the foundations and basically Mr. Li acknowledged that it is a standard detail so every job that Commissioner Guinnane looked at on Mr. Li’s drawings had the same detail with doweling in and putting a spread footing on there.  Commissioner Guinnane said that obviously every one of those jobs that had been done and CFC’d by the City have inadequate foundations underneath them.  Commissioner Guinnane said that he wanted to find out what the City was going to do about notifying those individual owners that they have inadequate foundations.  Director Chiu said that anytime someone (?) brings it to the attention of the Department that a project is not done properly the Department always revisits that, as the Commissioners already know. Director Chiu said that the Department was going to look at all of the jobs done by this individual to see if there is a pattern of this type of system and if there is then the Department would take some action, but right now he did not have that information.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that he told Hanson originally to go back to the office and do a random sample of jobs on any engineer, look at the detail and if it was a good detail, scratch that individual off of a list and go on to another one and now all of a sudden there is a big backlog here because of a certain few individuals.  Director Chiu said that the last time Commissioner Guinnane asked the Department to do a random check Commissioner Guinnane felt that the random process wasn’t enough and directed staff to go back and do much more detailed spot checking.  Commissioner Guinnane said that representation came from Hanson that 4109 was an isolated project with James Li and when it came back up again Commissioner Guinnane had two more projects that were not on the list and even had eight more.  Commissioner Guinnane said that Hanson was supposed to come up with a new list and to date, the Commission had not been given that list.  Director Chiu said that he was confused and asked if Commissioner Guinnane wanted the Department to drop looking at every project that James Li does.   Commissioner Guinnane said that it is already done as he has looked at all of the vertical and horizontal jobs and James Li acknowledged that it was a standard sheet that he used; he did not deny it. 

Vice-President Hood said that this is very typical as Structural Engineers use the same details over and over again for the same situations and this is how everybody works.  Vice-President Hood said that she thought that the basic question is how should it be done from the point of view of a Structural Engineer and from the Building Code and that is the only issue. 

Commissioner Marks said that she sees what are called the “monster” homes now where third and fourth floor additions are now common where in the past it hadn’t been, so are the Plan Checkers still operating where most remodeling was just of the existing framework so they are not looking at the foundations when there are three and four levels being added.  President Santos said that this is why he thought there should be written guidelines and said that he would be happy to work with Hanson Tom on this, as it is a policy related issue.  President Santos said that sometimes old foundations are not taken out because of the danger of underpinning the neighbor’s problems.  President Santos said that perhaps a pamphlet could come out of his discussions with Hanson to make things easier for both the customer and the Department. Director Chiu said that verification is the solution, verification of the existing foundation and guidelines as to what has to be done.

Vice-President Hood said that she wanted to get it into the record on the last item that this Commission is not hiring an outside Attorney, but has just requested the City Attorney to give the Commission permission to do so and any legal advice being sought from outside Attorneys is being done on an individual basis, not on this Commission’s basis.

 

6.

Discussion and possible action regarding update on 2454 Geary Blvd.   Update on 5/21/04 site visit by Commissioners Guinnane and Santos. [Commissioners Guinnane and Santos]

President Santos said that when he and Commissioner Guinnane reviewed the documentation at the site it appeared that there was a series of permits that included some site permits, planning documentation and structural and architectural documentation.  President Santos said that they thought that in that particular property with the issue related to the attic and the new configuration of the roof framing has not gone through the proper channels, in other words, the Project Sponsor had not filed for a 311 notification to modify the configuration of the roof.  President Santos said that the Project Sponsor had kept the ridgelines as defined on some of his plans, but the modification of the roofline has not been notified to the neighbors.  President Santos said that the Project Sponsor was informed that he should not be performing any type of work that was encapsulated within the attic space and should go immediately to an Architectural Planning review and should notify the neighbors of his intent to legalize the attic space.  President Santos said that the District Inspector at the time stated that he had written some Notices of Violation and a Stop Work Order relating to this particular project and that it was important that the Project Sponsor move quickly to notify the neighbors of his intent to utilize the attic space.  President Santos stated that as soon as those permits were obtained and all of the documentation was provided to the Inspector the Project Sponsor could go back to work.  President Santos said that he concurred with one comment Commissioner Guinnane made and that was that the work that had been done appeared to be adequate construction and did not seem to be an unusual or deceitful way of implementing any of the work that had been done at the time.  President Santos said that no evidence was shown to he and Commissioner Guinnane that the Project Sponsor had permits to change the configuration of the roof. 

Commissioner Guinnane said that in looking at the actual drawings that were submitted this individual actually deceived the Department because the ridgeline was raised up and it did not show the outside roof on the exterior walls being raised 3’ 6” to get more headroom inside up in the roof area.  Commissioner Guinnane said that this seems to be an ongoing pattern with this particular individual.  Vice-President Hood asked if the Planning Department asked that the work be stopped.  Commissioner Guinnane said that it wasn’t the Planning Department, as they didn’t even realize that there was a problem out there; it was the Building Department.  President Santos said that the Project Sponsor was asked to submit his drawings to the Planning Department so that they can do the Architectural Review and also do the 300 ft. notification.  President Santos said that as far as he knew the work was stopped on the building.  Commissioner Guinnane stated that work is going on out there every day.  President Santos asked Inspector Sweeney to come forward and make a comment on that.  Inspector Sweeney said that the Department does not go out there every day, but when the Department spot checks it, work is still proceeding.  Mr. Sweeney said that he had a meeting with the project sponsor last week and he seemed to be perplexed about what was talked about at the meeting because his version of the events were that the Department was going to issue the permits that were on file that don’t correctly describe the work to be done.  Mr. Sweeney said that the Project Sponsor said that he would file a revision for the roof.  Mr. Sweeney said that it was his understanding that before the Project Sponsor started any work he was going to provide a revision and Mr. Sweeney said he was still not sure what the Project Sponsor was going to do.  President Santos asked if the Project Sponsor filed for the revision.  Mr. Sweeney said that he had not.  Vice-President Hood said that she did not understand that if the project sponsor is doing work that does not meet the submitted drawings why he is allowed to continue building.  Mr. Sweeney said that the Project Sponsor refuses to stop work.  Vice-President Hood asked if the Department had the ability to get a court order to stop him from working.  Mr. Sweeney stated that he had gone to the City Attorney and the City Attorney said they were going to file a lawsuit and a stay away order, but the last time he called the City Attorney the City Attorney told him he was on it and would call Mr. Sweeney when he finished.  Vice-President Hood asked who that was.  Mr. Sweeney said that it was Ernestine Cirilo. 

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that at the Litigation Committee over a month ago he was directed by the members to obtain a TRO (temporary restraining order) on the project and explained that to the City Attorney at the meeting to expedite the process and now five or six weeks later and the City Attorney’s Office has still not given the Department the tools to enforce this.  Vice-President Hood asked if there was anything posted at the property telling them not to work.  Mr. Sweeney said that the Department had posted the property at least three times this go around and had posted it more in the past.  Vice-President Hood asked if there was a letter to the City Attorney requesting this.  Mr. Hutchinson said that he did not think it was necessary when there were two Commissioners and himself requesting it at a meeting.  Vice-President Hood said that it was necessary to get it in writing to protect the Department.  Commissioner Marks said that this was a real problem if it was taking the City Attorney this long to issue the TRO. 

At this point President Santos had to leave the meeting and Vice-President Hood took over.

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that he was not surprised that the project sponsor on this project would thumb his nose at this Commission and it was for that reason that he asked previously, when Inspector Sweeney reported that when he issued the notice they laughed at him and continued to work, that this Commission form a taskforce whose function would be to deal with scofflaws.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that when there is a scofflaw such as is at this present site there would be a system of protocol that within twenty-four hours direct action would be taken.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this would bring together the City Attorney, the District Attorney, and members from the industry with some Commissioners to come up with a process of immediate action to deal with these scofflaws, otherwise there is going to be this whole system of ignoring because there are not teeth in the system.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that there had to be real scissors into the teeth because that is what is necessary.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this person and others know the rules and how to get around them so the Commission needs to convene this taskforce, not one to study how to make up new rules and regulations that are already impacting good contractors.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that with the Department issuing 55,000 permits a year there are going to be people who are going to break the rules and they will know how to break them legally.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that these people bring defamation down on the rest of the industry so that Inspectors are on the carpet when they go out and carry out their jobs and they feel they are not getting the support from the Department or the Commission. 

 

7.

Discussion and possible action regarding a proposed ordinance amending Section 10.100-45 of the San Francisco Administrative Code to remove from the Building Inspection Fund all fines and penalties collected by the Department of Building Inspection. [Director Chiu]

Vice-President Hood said that she believed that this would apply to not only minor fines like somebody who does work without a permit and is fined $2,000, but also the very large amounts of money that the Department has collected through lawsuits against scofflaw apartment owners.   Vice-President Hood said that one of the lawsuits that was recently settled was in the amount of $750,000 some of the funds were used to pay the Attorney’s fees because the Department could spend a lot of money to collect these fines and not be allowed to pay for the expenses involved under this legislation.  Vice-President Hood said that this looked like another attempt to try and bankrupt the Department because DBI is required by law to go after the people who violate the Code, but would have no way of paying for it from the Department’s collections from those people.

Director Chiu said that he would like staff to go over with the Commission the amount of money that the Department would not be receiving as a result of this legislation. 

Mr. Leo McFadden introduced himself as the Senior Inspector for the Code Enforcement Division.   Mr. McFadden said that what he had to state and what the Litigation Committee members could confirm was that not all cases referred to the City Attorney result in fees, fines or penalties and the ones that do don’t always cover the City Attorney’s costs.  Mr. McFadden stated that this would mean that DBI would be paying for the City Attorney’s fees with no revenue return and it would drain DBI’s resources.  Mr. McFadden said that the result would probably be that there wouldn’t be an incentive to refer any cases to the City Attorney in the future.  Mr. McFadden said that this also affects the Disabled Access Division, which is in charge of enforcing the handicapped provisions of the Code.  Vice-President Hood said that the DAD had a 4,000 case backlog at the time this Commission was formed. Mr. McFadden said that was correct and said that this would be a disservice to the citizens of San Francisco because it impedes DBI’s ability to refer cases of scofflaws and building offenders to bring their buildings into compliance.

Vice-President Hood asked where this legislation came from.   Director Chiu said that Supervisors Sandoval, Daley and McGoldrick sponsored it.  Director Chiu stated that he wanted to report that the dollar amount would be approximately $1.7M.  Vice-President Hood asked if there were any position papers on this issue.  Commissioner Marks said that she thought that Director Chiu could write a letter based on today’s discussion.  Vice-President Hood said that she thought that the Director and the President of the Commission should both sign a letter and it should be done right away.  Commissioner Marks said that these Supervisors did not understand what they were doing by taking this money away.

Mr. O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders Association said that this would devastate the Housing Division Section of DBI, no question about it.   Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was sure that David Novrodosky when he finds out about this would hit the ceiling.  Mr. O’Donoghue said the RBA has been critical of the Mayor’s Office for their shortsightedness and also critical of the Board of Supervisors and part of the problem that Planning has today was that the Board of Supervisors took actions similar to what this proposal is that drained the resources from Planning. Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA asked Planning to bill the Board of Supervisors for the amount of time they were spending at defacto Supervisorial/Planning Commission hearings never did anything so as a result of inaction Planning is in serious trouble.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that Commissioner Marks’ suggestion was entirely proper and responsible and the Commission and the Department should let the Board of Supervisors know what the impact would be.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that as a result of the creation of this Commission and the enforcement of this Commission every tenant has heat in their buildings under a law that was passed in 1978, but was never implemented until this Commission became a reality.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this Commission was able to ensure through enforcement policies that all landlords had to provide one of the basic necessities for people, especially the elderly, which was heat.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that if the Housing Department is going to have less staff then the enforcement is going to deteriorate and scofflaw landlords will go back to the way they were prior to the creation of this Commission.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that he was sure that Supervisors Daley, Sandoval and McGoldrick once they are informed of the facts would back off because it is a case of not being educated to the reality.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this would have a serious impact on the Department.  Vice-President Hood stated that all three of these Supervisors are known for their concerns about housing for low-income people. 

Deputy Director Jim Hutchinson said that he wanted to thank the Commission for their support in trying to keep these fines and penalties with the Department because a lot of this has to do with residential housing and with the poor and disenfranchised.   Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department is in the properties on Sixth Street on a daily basis and the Department wants to respond quickly to let the people see the presence of the Department and know that the monies are put back into enforcement to make sure that people do the right thing.  Mr. Hutchinson said that the Department is proud of this program and would like to keep these funds.

Vice-President Hood asked if Items 9 & 10 could be continued.   Commissioner Marks said that Item #8 should also be continued.  Vice-President Hood asked if there were any objections.  These items were continued.

 

8.

Discussion and possible action on the update of DBI’s progress in meeting with the recommendations of the 2001 Controller’s Management Audit. [Director Chiu and Assistant Director Lee] – continued

 

9.

Discussion and possible action regarding legislation for abatement of interior lead based paint and DBI’s programs as to cost versus income. [Commissioner Guinnane] – continued

 

10.

Discussion and possible action regarding permits issued for square footage expansion in the last five years with values of $20,000 or more where the work has been completed, but no CFC issued. [Commissioner Guinnane] – continued

 

11.

Review Commissioner’s Questions and Matters.

 

 

a.

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

Vice-President Hood said that many items came up during the meeting and asked if there were any additional items.  There were none.

 

 

 

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.

Vice-President Hood said that she would like an update on the matters that were discussed in the Closed hearing and the discussion of those in public afterwards.   Commissioner Marks said that regarding Item #8 several meeting ago the Department was supposed to respond to the Controller’s Office and a copy of that was to be sent to the Commissioners.  Assistant Director Amy Lee said that it was the response to the Grand Jury. 

Secretary Aherne said that she wanted to remind the Commissioners that the next meeting was going to be after the Abatement Appeals Board and that SPUR and the AIA would be coming to the meeting to do a presentation.  Vice-President Hood said that perhaps these items could be continued until the meeting after the next one.

 

 

12.

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

Mr. Joe O’Donoghue of the Residential Builders said that last Wednesday, at the Finance Committee meeting the issue of $1.2M or $1.3M requested from the Mayor’s Office was put before the Board of Supervisors and members of the RBA went down to testify against that appropriation.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that interestingly enough the Mayor’s Office was present including members of the Planning Department, none of whom testified at the hearing, but for the second time again the Mayor’s Office with the concurrence of Planning asked for a continuance of the matter until this Wednesday’s hearing.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA intended to turn out in mass at Wednesday’s hearing to testify again why that appropriation was illegal and it was like Jesse James coming in to hold up the bank and DBI is like the bank, they have the money.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the RBA has gotten the word from behind the scenes, informally, that the Mayor’s Office is not considering that request a moot point and that the transfer request will not be going forward.  Mr. O’Donoghue stated that what this indicates is that since this Department was created through a political process and that while the RBA has many disagreements with the community when someone goes out they can build a great coalition if they have principles and merit to their arguments.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that this started today with the Building Inspectors, with Leo McFadden being a new leader in the Building Inspectors Association and interestingly enough there was no one present from Local 22 or no one from the Plumbers, but that is not strange because they were strong supporters of the Mayor.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that the next step is to go out to the public to show the impact and the affect of this Commission and being on Channel 26 has now led to an informed public and the employees watch these meetings.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that there is a broad base of support out there and said that he believed that this broad base was one of the reasons that Proposition J overwhelming won which was the downtown plan, another scam on the community.  Mr. O’Donoghue said that some disinterested people recently watching the BIC commented that this is good government.  Mr. O’Donoghue congratulated the Commission on their good work. 

 

13.

 Adjournment.

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

RESOLUTION NO. BIC 033-004

The meeting adjourned at 12:16 p.m..

 

 

 

Respectfully Submitted,



________________________
Ann Marie Aherne
Commission Secretary

 



SUMMARY OF REQUESTS BY COMMISSIONERS

Vice President Hood would like an update on the matters that were discussed in the Closed hearing and the discussion of those in public afterwards. – Vice President Hood

Page 27

Commissioner Marks would like to follow up on the Department’s response to the Grand Jury Report. – Commissioner Marks

Page 27