reviewing this further and coming back with a review. >> in that case i withdraw my second. [inaudible] >> just to let you know, this is sort of the same situation as the last item, regardless of what we do, the board of supervisors will vote on it. what we do afterwards, they may vote for it or against it. we are simply not giving a chance to give them our opinion. >> i can say that i could definitely relate our conversation to the supervisors , delaying a vote on this until we have had further discussion. >> we would certainly love to talk to them and trade ideas. >> at least for me, there does not seem to be the body of statistical information, or at

least coordination between the industry or cohesiveness to the direction of thought necessary to create a prohibition as opposed to where regulatory enforcement can put it in place. an option for homeowners, as opposed to outright preventing or prohibiting the use of torch's. because flames are used for a lot of other instances and there is no provision of using, for example, a barbecue gas flame barbeque on a wooden deck. >> how about i make a motion to continue this item and have the department come up with some suggestions on how we can regulate this practice.

building some statistics, perhaps looking for the supervisor's office to sign it. hopefully he will understand and take that into consideration once the discussion is on the level. >> we would be very supportive of that. >> second. >> do we have to call a vote? >> can we continue the item? >> all of those in favor? >> aye. >> any opposed? the motion is continued. the next item is item number 7.

>> good morning, commissioners. the development impact program went into effect on july 1. as of yesterday we had 30 applications in the feed program with total valuation dove over $2.5 million. we are expecting some bigger projects to be submitted near the end of the month. we have spent hours of staff time explaining the process to project sponsors that would like to take advantage of this program that have not heard of it before. of course, we have frequent customers to know the program and are working with applicants. it is working, albeit very slow, but it is working better compared to last year at this time.

it is having an impact on the amount of projects being submitted for plan jackets. >> how many were on the list that were potentially going to apply or had permits? aside from the 30 that of wide and can be notified or educated on this? -- that applied or can be notified or educated on this? >> in terms of readiness for approval without government impact fees, we have had three of those projects come forward. they are still held up in planning. the permits i am talking about our applications that are brand new to the system. these are brand new projects, family homes, replacement decks,

additions and things like this. when people do hear about it, they are really proud of the fact that we're looking towards them and trying to help them financially. >> thank you. are any of the eastern neighborhood projects moving forward? >> i think that one of them has submitted further, that is all. just one so far. >> thank you. >> any public comments on item number 7? >> i see none. >> item #8, report on the process of handling, managing, and resolving billing notices of violation issues to property owners. >> good morning, commissioners.

i am handling ore processing the building violation from the property owners. i am pleased to report today on this item. i will give you a brief overview and respond to some specific questions as we get more details. i have some reporting data, if you need that, and welcome the opportunity for discussion. as you know, let me begin with an introduction and i will go over some terms and complaints, notices of violation and orders of abatement. in general, for our approach, as public safety is a matter of paramount importance and the goal of the code enforcement section is to obtain compliance with all required safety regulations while protecting due process of the parties involved.

ideally there is voluntary compliance. >> unfortunately, punitive measures can be necessary to divorce compliance. balancing complaints about the lack of action on troubled properties against the property owners that are requesting more time to solve a violation. we recognize that this is an important quality of life issue for the community and a balance that goes on on a daily basis. chapter one of our sentences of building code contains administrative provisions that govern this process. briefly, let me go over the terms and documents involve as we get to the notice of violation. the first one is the complaints. under the code in section 103, excuse me, 102, there are three

occasions where we will respond to a general complaint. one, the building official determines the need for an investigation based on observations in daily activities. general reasonable suspicion that something has occurred. the other is a valid complaint, received from a citizen or an external source. currently the department receives anonymous complaints where we maintain cut potentiality and the person does not have to give a name. yesterday we got an e-mail from australia of someone who had seen online an image of a bedroom in the city where the child had put a bed room under a clause that might carry potter.

they ask if it was a violation. one example of a complaint that comes from that type of source. often the complaints are not valid and we make that determination. the third condition is we get a referral from another city departments. planning, public works, and we will that respond to that. generally what happens is we will come out and make the inspection, but as they come in we have a process of complaints received, where the deputy director or assigned staff will sign that complain to another inspector if it is beyond the scope of the work, such as fire damage or a board of appeals emergency response. some of them will be in -- assigned to code enforcement, which is the city attorney task force that we're working with, various supervisory inquiries,

planning enforcement, changing of use and occupancy, that is what we will go out on. in terms of the health department or someone else with jurisdiction, they can more adequately address the complaint. once we determine that the complaint is valid we will go out to the property address. at that time to make a finding. no violation, we will abate, communicate, possibly correct the action verbally and tried to reasonably work for compliance. addressing the complainant's issue in terms of quality of life, the code says that the owner has 30 days to file a permit to erect the action. 10 days later we would issue a notice of violation. perhaps a correction notice to give the person to voluntarily take care of this before we issued a notice of violation. one of that document is issued, that is the official legal

document that contains the essential element, the violation description, cost estimate, penalty involved, and timeline for the hearing and determination that it is an unsafe building. we will tailor the correction or notice of violation depending on the nature of the violation more respectively, giving it five days, 10 days, depending on the nature. time is important because there is a due process requirements under the code. once the notice of violation is issued and directed, there may be penalties. we can talk about that. once the notice is issued, they have time to comply to address the issue. if they fail to do that, the code would save scheduled public hearing. we generally issue of second notice of violation, with good

insurance to essentially make sure that the facts are correct and that we provide the specific circumstances, giving them another 30 days to comply. if the owner fails to comply, whether it is a violation issued by electrical or building housing inspection, they would then refer the case to code enforcement. at that point we have officers and inspectors that will prepare the case for the public hearing, which involves the the assessor's parcel and phase preparation. one important thing about that if we had a recent visit from the city attorney office to our building inspectors. it was very helpful, because we wanted to understand how important our documents are and the emphasizing the need to produce a fully developed administrative record in a timely manner, something that is easily said it takes a lot of work and it is important to get

these details direct in terms of the finances and business of the city. the issue of the note of the directors hearing, if the person is given time, they can of beer and that time give testimony and there will be a finding made by the building official. that order is now the critical factor once you are done with the appeals and various processes. that is the document that has been reported on the title. with that there are basically two tracks that occur. one is the compliance permit, which might involve penalties, etc., and then there is the assessment of the cost. those two actions need to be taken for us to lift the revocation and release it from the title. if someone fails to pay the assessment costs, we have many

orders of abatement still on properties. on a manual basis we do this annually, replacing those costs with reporting and interest charges on the tax bill according to the board of supervisors occurring within the next two weeks of august 3. generally that is the way that the process works right now. the timing and volume of cases in which we did the referral varies quite a lot, there is a lot of history from old cases the new cases. the priority is generally gauge of on safety issues, which are of paramount importance. immediate public safety and any other criteria used to get compliance. if there are specific questions you might have all? >> medstar? it is my understanding that an

inspector goes out on a complaint, saying something like he issues a letter, the need to correct this within 30 days and if you do not stop correcting it, 10 days afterwards, 40 days from now, the notice of violation becomes valid. >> not entirely correct. sometimes there will be a written notice. but it might be a document that we issue in notice of documentation. generally compliance will be verbal. >> at the issue of the notice you start from 30 days? >> if not written we give them the code allowing them the time to file the permit required. they have that window to come in and do that. we generally tried to work with people.

they did not notice the scaffolding and they get someone to come in. >> do they invite the inspector to the job site? determining whether there is a violation or not? >> initially when the complaint is received, as staff -- as the staff gathers the data, we will search our system. someone just called me about that yesterday, asking why we would send someone out on a complaint if there was a permit. saying it was a waste of time, but not necessarily. there are quite a range of descriptions. once we get out there, we make the determination of whether or not the violation exists and if a corrective action needs to be taken. even if there is an active permit, we will give the district inspector to verify that they are staying within

their scope of work, if it is a more critical factor. doing alterations. this is where the noise is occurring. they are working on the deck and we tell them they need to get one of those permits. we tried to negotiate and regulate. >> everything you have seen over the years is not new. is there a way to make the system for the series of evaluations, like a triage for emergency room, more efficient to the point where there is time activity that reduces the number of cases that keep on pilings up? >> in a general question, i would agree that that is the case. in a way, because of our efforts we will have a duplication and different agencies in the city will converge on one property.

clearly, if we had them establish a central clearing house, we would tend to do that. often it is a rapid response, like a call from a homeowner who wanted someone out there now because they were working right now and she wanted us to catch them in the act. we did not have the available staff to respond at 3:00 in the afternoon that day. clearly, that is the judgment and somewhat of a policy. >> is there a way to have that as part of the public responsibility to participate by saying that if the violators are there at 3:00, at the end of the day can be held with

documentation? >> to some extent, they hand. when other neighbors in the community have an issue, and it becomes more of a community issue, more attention is paid. often what i see in appeals hearings advisor, property owners will pay the reason why they could not comply. other property owners will say that they followed all of the rules, so in a way this is just a balance. as a commission or department, the public values in terms of what we want to enforce, strictly, it is a factor in how we do it. back to my original introduction of the phone call for why we are doing something, right now it has been a tough year because of the economic

situation. fees have gone up. for a lot of people financially it is an overwhelming cycle we are looking at in terms of permit fees and costs. >> what is the timeframe between a complaint and when people go out? we got a packet of information that it was a few months. i do none of that is true or not. >> from the building department, from our perspective, that is not the case. if it was the case, it would be one that was lost or we lost the case and i would hope that the person would call back, we are attempting to respond to every complaint within 48 hours. the nature of the complaint, which will determine somewhat

the response for lack of response, often there will be multiple complaints on a property where we have not got the date. part of the process is the paper that we produce. sometimes we cannot get the data in the computer fast enough. we got them before they could charge the fee penalty. we tried to administrate the best we can. we have to follow the code.

>> we could get that data in terms of property data. my experience is that it is residential slower in compliance against commercial properties, one of the things that happens is if you walk into our office, anyone can get a permit. if you have a violation it will come up on a flag. we do not want to issue a permit to a building that is potentially unsafe. contributing to that had their comedy did that work continue with violations addressed? maintaining the safe building. >> commissioner? >> i asked for this matter to be

heard. for them to look at opportunities where we can save staff time, shortening the time line to resolve these issues before they become appeals issues, perhaps even to engage the property owner, even on an earlier stage. what i would like to ask, when someone receives a violation, if they disagree with what the inspectors said, what opportunity they have? can they request to go straight to the directors hearing? the way that i understand it, we place the item on the directors hearing if they do not respond after a few inspections, correct? >> yes, we scheduled the case

for the directors hearing. there is a code that allows people to bypass that provision. >> i am not talking about bypass. >> but there is a provision of code that would allow that. >> that is not what i am asking. if someone gets a notice of violation, can the requests a hearing? >> yes. >> really? is that on the notice? >> in terms of wanting to have it moved up as soon as possible? or are you saying that they are challenging the determination of the inspector? generally we would then go to the senior inspector. or the chief inspector. saying that they do not feel they are being fair, it does not happen often but i notice of bias would make the determination. >> i am thinking more about it being a public setting rather than a hearing setting.

sort of like they are appealing the decision of the inspectors, right? >> i did state that that is the forum for the public to enter their evidence. that is the opportunity for them. >> this is something that we talked about in line and what was decided was that we would achieve command if a building inspector or house inspector goes out to make this determination to write a violation on any item in the code, that person would have the right to go to a supervisor, who at that point would be a senior chief deputy director. ultimately to the commission. there is a whole layer of appeals. generally these things are resolved very quickly within

the first 30 days to 60 days. often because of the complex nature of permitting in san francisco, it involves multiple agencies and oftentimes you can see far down two, three, four years. the financial situation of the customer can change to where they cannot do the work. as we saw today, we have one from 2000 to. it is now 2010 and she had various problems with people coming from getting across. >> that was that of -- one of them not acting to finalize the permit. if we have a process of going to a superior and ultimately ending up with a director, that is sufficient.

the challenge, i think, are the ones that linger on and on. some of which are because we do not have anything in our files to say yo, this has been open for a while. the engineering system is one of making it work better for the public and the staff. >> the reason i ask, remember last week? we had to issue to the gentleman that kept saying i disagree with the department's's assertion that there is led i and my pain -- in the pain -- lead paint. i am just wondering if that person had an opportunity before it got to us. >> they could have gone to the

senior housing inspector. >> adding what was recorded? >> is there a flow chart that the police can find a more visually understandable? sometimes it is a more linear half as opposed to a graphic visual, which then shows you different avenues, streets, or different peril. >> we have them available on the web site. >> may be having something written on the notice of violation about the options. >> exactly. >> perhaps just that you have options. >> with the paint, a third

tht who could possibly in day to the property owner -- inveigh to the property owner and said, "what you're doing is wrong?" maybe by the time it gets to us our first question is, "did you explain this to somebody before ?" that would help maybe relieve some of those cases and may be educate the person. i am not saying that is the only case i am referring to, but maybe some people do need to help. maybe some people do need an understanding that what they are doing is wrong. on the flip side, maybe the department or the hearing officer can sympathize with the problem. maybe they can make some sort of compromise or agreement before it reaches us. i am just talking out loud,