of process work. but at this address, there is a cone of silence that cannot be heard. this property has this protection around it. i cannot explain it. i am an architect and i practice in the city. if my job site look like that house, i would be fired. there is work going on at that house without permits. there has been for seven years. this department has utterly failed that woman. she has spent tens of thousands of dollars trying to get your department to do its job. how did she get compensated? why are there so many complaints? if you have a horizontal addition in the back that has never been permitted, the first thing you have to have on the

permit is the notice of violation and work that would make the scope legal. that means it has to get to planning because it needs 311 notice. somehow, these applications all come in as over the counter and none of them acknowledge the legal horizontal addition, none are expected to, they all get taken in through intake and computer holds are dropped so that permits can be issued over the counter in the next day they're put back on. there is something going on. someone should find out what and make sure this is not something that gets repeated or becomes the norm for how the department works without a rudder. we heard today that the department has no rudder and there are no directives telling them what and how to do. it has to come from somewhere.

from a policy board. >> thank you. >> i think you already spoke on this. >> the inspectors to come out -- >> i don't think you can. >> thank you. >> ideal a lot with nov's and it is hard to send someone out for a job to see what's going on. you are hearing one side of the story, not both sides. i do not know the case, but i think you ought to look both sides of the story and see

what's going on. i do know i have been a regular customer since 1975 and i worked all lot on these cases and they are tough. i have had to go through all sorts of issues to take care of these. i just don't know what's going on with these folks, but i will say from my experience, they've been doing the best they can considering the calls that come through with complaints and many of them are not even legitimate, just neighbor against neighbor. >> thank you. >> additional public comment? item #6. >> our chief plumbing inspector

was unable to be here today, but he wanted to let the commission know we're dealing with over the counter plan checks for some of the wilder systems that currently and we are managing to do them, due to the simplicity of the system is being proposed, if they become more complex, we will look at charging a planned checking fee, but at the current time we are issuing minimum permits for the gray water system to encourage people to actually install the systems. >> is there a checklist week have by which we could check off that we had made preliminary reviews so that when they come back later on, if they want to pursue the next stage of fulfilling what they want to objectively go beyond the

preliminary review, that's where the meter will start running? >> what he is doing right now is giving a list for comments on their plans so they can come back and correct it when it is ready to issue. if they decide to install the system, in some cases they cannot be installed due to the nature of the property. but in most cases, he will make suggestions and give them notices. >> the department conducts pro bono front end by extending professional courtesy sets that later on, if they want to take it to the next level that they can act upon it with hot and form the material as opposed to just trying to find out how and what they're going to do?

>> yes. the puc is asking for another station to be installed so they can inform the public of their programs. that will be beneficial to the department. >> will that be on a designated date as opposed to a full week? >> they are asking for a permanent station monday through friday. that is a great help to the department right now. >> and that personnel, that is basically on their dime? >> yes. we have to personnel on site right now and they are asking to be able to add a third so they can expand their programs and expand the explanation counters. >> i think this is a good movement in terms of letting the

residents who want to put in a gray water system no what they are confronting. i was wondering if there could be something where there are questions about what moves from a simple system to a more complicated ones so that the homeowners and contractors will know this is what they are up against said they know they have to come back and deal with a more costly system? >> we have the gray water installation manual that will be published and is under draft form right now. it describes the various systems. >> thank you. >> any public comment on item number 6? >> item #7, get proposed new it ministry of bulletin. for waiving a special inspection

requirements for signs and awnings. >> good morning, commissioner and directors. these bulletins were written in 2003. their records search at that time, the awning and sign craft unions president came to our department complaining about special inspection requirements for very small awnings. the job could cost a thousand dollars and may be cost sometimes up to $1,000. the cost is prohibitive to get the job and close the job. that was the purpose at that time, how this bulletin came about, just to make sure we look

at the reality, to promote permits to take out the awning and craft metal industry. since then, the bulletin was written around 2003 and it has been set all this time. since then, we have to code changes and i want to have our structural committees review them one more time before we adopt it. i want these items to be continued until the next hearing. >> >> you say this is going to go back to the structural committee? >> it is a bit extreme for

single-family homes and residential properties that, under this. >> there should be two sets of rules. i know that a lot of these canopies and they require tie downs and all that other stuff. that would require special inspections and i'm sure our engineer would attest, but this would be a financial burden of and small businesses and i'm glad it is going back to the committee and i hope they take that into consideration. >> i think by next month, i should have it crafted for review. >> will this establish more

specification or standard of performance of what they can do or need to do, but not necessarily as more vague guideline without being assessed a fee? >> i think from the small canopy, when the weight was so small and if they over design it, they have more anchored than is necessary. i don't think we need to have more special inspections to be performed on that. we have to look at the hazardous situation. we don't want to have a sign on a very high elevation and a collapse. we have to take a look at the canopy. and overdesigned item could be validated by the contractor

rather than special inspector. we are looking for the means to help out the awning and metal craft industries so we can hopefully come up with a process to not have costly special inspectors that prohibit them from getting the permit. >> use a 2003 was the last time they came before the is structural committee? >> yes. >> what happened since? >> [unintelligible] it has been on technical service for all of these years. >> nobody came and challenged it up to this time? >> i did not hear of it until

now. i am glad to have this reappear on my desk. >> special inspections are very expensive. it's a burden that small homeowners -- if it can be avoided, there should be some consideration where it is split, commercial, residential, and at the discretion of the land checker. the plan checker will understand -- we do have these bulletins so you don't have asking indiscriminately for special inspection. >> also the size of the building -- >> we have to make some deviations from the awning, a

canopy and a small sign. >> there needs to be clearer directions for the plan checker because the natural thing for the plant sector to do is check his own but and passed on to special inspection with total disregard for the owner. >> that was the reason we wanted to develop these bulletins. >> thank you very much. >> any public comment on item number seven? >> we will just continue it? >> promotion?

-- a motion? >> i make a motion to continue it until after the structural committee hears it. >> [roll-call] >> the motion to continue the item passes. item #8 is the records report. an update on the finances. >> i'm the deputy director of the department of building inspection. the report in front of you is for year to date through may 2011, which is a 11 months. we have 11 -- we have about three weeks left in the fiscal year. we continue to see a flow

increase in charges for services and we are projecting a surplus there. we have seen this year a slower rate of requests for refunds. most requests for refunds are small items. the most would-be 13 to $20,000. two years ago, we saw them in the $100,000 to $150,000 refunds for very small projects. in terms of expenditures, we have continued to have difficulty in getting our requisitions approved and getting list to add positions. we are close to hiring engineers and we have some other requisitions that are very close

to getting through. we are showing a little more in terms of savings in non personal services and savings and supplies. we historically have been slow in materials and supplies predominantly because we have gotten our staff used to the bare bones and they want to try to be economical. we are working on looking at what still needs to be purchased this fiscal year. we are still seeing that we have other departments paying us for the services they are obligated to pay us. even though it looks like it is in a deficit position, it is

primarily because of funding work orders that we have where other departments are paying money but we do not have to do the services because it's on an as needed basis. they set up a mechanism for our work, but if it is not required, we don't build it and they don't pay yes. -- they don't pay us. we're talking about a $6 million amount at the end of the year and when that goes into the fund balance, the first thing we need to do is look at all of the permits that have been issued and make sure we set aside sufficient funds to be able to continue to work on those. in the last couple of years when the economy was going badly, we had to pay for current work on something that

was filed many years ago. we were using current revenues to pay for that. the first thing that comes off the top of this $6 million is the calculation for the deferred credit. we still may seek changes in work orders. we are projecting to spend the full amount in work orders, but the other departments, if they seek workers' compensation or something like that, they will not bill last for costs that were not incurred. this is subject to change, as you know. although we close at the fiscal year at the end of the month, there are changes that occur and we will let you know after we do some of these calculations what we are looking at.

any questions? >> this $6.6 million surplus, is that projected? >> yes. we do not know until your actually closes and we'd do deferred credits and we get the bills in. this is the projected. >> would that include the fee coming in from high-speed rail? >> the joint powers board has paid us for a planned review activity over the past year. that includes everything, the work they have submitted to us and we will be deferring some of

that, but variable of its because you only defer in the case where you have not done all the work associated with whatever they submitted a job as. they had permits for plan review for buttress and for shoring. when they come in and submit it and we did review, we bill them, we get the money and is included. >> but they have not picked up their permit yet? >> they have not submitted their permit nor has it been planned for the high-speed train station or the ground structure. that is expected to come in august.

that is about 8 $5 million project. >> is that part of the 6.6 -- >> is not. >> that's the answer i wanted. >> how do we make the objective decision to defer a certain amount of the fee? is that based on a percentage basis or is that based on some lump sum? >> there is a detailed calculation that includes the number of years the permit has been there, so there is a specific amount put into deferred credits. there is a certain amount for inspections put into deferred credits. what happens is you have to look at how much you need to put into it and how much is coming out.

after a permit is done, if it has been seven years, the cost of the permit goes into the fund balance. since we've got all these other permits in this year, we have to calculate how much has to go into the deferred credit. it is a very detailed program we have put together to do the calculation. it is not subjective. >> i don't see anything in there for training. for training staff or learning the new code, building inspectors -- >> this is the current year. the current year, you would not be able to see how much we spent on that because it is rolled up into non-personal services in

the details. we can provide you a further level of detail if you let us -- >> i would like to see that and i would like to find out if the department is going to bring a trainer here or if you are going to send people out. i had a discussion with some of the commissioners and we think it would be better if you brought a trainer and late rather than sending people to various parts of the state's and all that other stuff. you might want to take that into consideration. >> this last year, we have done both -- there is training going on this week and we do things close by. >> i know there is training going on in san louis obispo and

they're not coming back in the evening. >> the training going on in san louis obispo is specialized training for emergency management. they will not do that in house. it's a program put on by the state and people have to attend that for a full week. there are specialized training that cannot be brought in house. we have people going into sacramento right now, and it is put on by the state. they do not do it in house. in some cases, we do have to send people to specialized training. >> for instance, the plumbing. we brought an instructor in to do the plumbing code changes training. >> i would like to know what's going on. i just got some answers. thank you for that. >> may be on your report next

month, there would be a global summary of where the trading had been done this year and maybe what is projected for the balance of the year, given it is that barry did to the non personal services category. at least we will know what percentage of cost would be relative to the projected revised budget. >> i have one more question. could you let us know about any new hires in the last 30 days or in the next 30 days? >> we are doing file -- we're doing final interviews for an engineer. >> i can't hear you. >> this is as loud as i could talk. >> i have that hearing.

>> we have an engineer going through the final interviews this week. >> what kind of engineer? >> civil. a civil engineer. >> was there a mechanical? >> there were too mechanical engineers promoted from within. their vacant positions will be refilled. there will be to more mechanical engineers coming in. >> to electrical engineers star -- to electrical inspectors started this week. there are some clerks that will be -- the advertisement is going out posted for two weeks and

then we start the process. but that is not going to happen until after july. >> and the duties of this civilian engineer? >> he is a plan checker in the plan check division. it is and other civil engineer plan checker. >> that's it for me. >> commissioners? >> with the budget from the mayor right now, is there any threat to those clerks we're going to hire or because it has been approved and we're waiting for it? >> it does not affect any for this year. the budget analyst puts out a report toward the end of the weekend we are still negotiating with them on what will be on their first cut sheet.

i like to explain their first cut sheet is like throwing pasta on the wall to see what sticks and what does not stick. we have a hearing on the 20th and another hearing on the 27th. in the meantime, we will try to negotiate cuts down to the minimum we can. >> earlier this year, we had a whole list that summarize close to under 100 positions being suggested to be filled, ranging from clerical -- it was some list you had submitted. >> there are couple of things we know.