thank you, commissioners. president murphy: thank you. next speaker, please. >> could you reset the clock, please? president murphy: three minutes. >> thank you. good monch, -- morning, commissioners. coalition for responsible growth. i just want to make a few points and try not to regurgitate some of the points that have already been made but lend my support to say there is an overwhelming opinion on them. the first thing, director, getting back to one of the points you made about some department heads not being at the meeting because of other commitments. i would like to suggest that directors at your level in the various different departments would actually consider this meeting that takes place once a

month as one of the ones that doesn't get off the calendar and is placed there above all other things because i think that this particular immediate ian and venue is a very, -- medium and venue is a very valuable opportunity to produce a lot and give great exposure to the public about what the department is doing for the people that again, getting back to the earlier comment, the customers who pay the bills. p.p.c. having to act as a

central quarterback role and clear everything. it felt like there was a lot of redundancy and having done so much work to improve things i felt it was unfortunate that we were maybe not going as far as we could to make things run more efficiently. for instance, and i missed the online agenda item earlier but i look forward to the day when people at the stations are looking at plans that are on an electronic screen. we are, after all, in the 22nd century. we are talking about preserving forests. everything ought to be online and you type a code on and the plans are there. you do what you have to do and it goes back to the next department. that is the way we should be going. i look forward to when we have that. finally, there is an opportunity to generate revenue within the d.b.i. you could put it on service and

say tell your architect to send the raw data files, we will convert them into an application that is readable and user friendly and guess what, we will type it out at the end of the assembly line ready for you to print or give it to you in a c.d. thank you very much. president murphy: thank you. next speaker, please. >> john kilgan from the san francisco coalition for responsible growth. president, commissioners, director, when i was planning to come here and consider a few thoughts i might share with you, certainly one of them was that i would be delighted to talk about

a customer delight. but from the speakers you have already listened to there is some merchant disappointment. -- there is some customers disappointment. i won't repeat all you heard. some thoughts on how to go forward. one of them that is emerging is perhaps to describe this in my words is to reenergize the public advisory committee. and what better way than those who are already having an active part of a director. from the people that spoke you may have sensed a hrelittle sur having taken place this morning. i would suggest that you would consider a broader survey of our customer base and perhaps an

independent group to carry that out and get a real sense of the pulse that is really happening for the customer as the word payer was used. quite rightly. and, director, i would welcome putting the minutes that you have considered up upon the web. so, let's get back to giving the payer really value for their money. thank you, president, commissioners, director. president murphy: thank you. any further public comments? seeing none, one more. three minutes. >> good morning, commissioners. i'm gary bell. i i'm, by profession, a permit expediter.

permit runner. i have been working maybe 20 years. i'm at the building department most every day helping others get their permits so i'm talking from that standpoint. my specific issue is about the site permit process. site permits are terrific. it is a wonderful vehicle to allow our customers, my clients, to get their entitlement approved before they go through the building department approval process. however, from a processing standpoint and moving the permit forward on a day-by-day basis it is very confusing and you need somebody like me to work through the process. i understand recently that there's some idea to change the site permit process. i understand also that the decisihow to change it lies with the director. i would like to encourage that

the public advisory committee be involved in the process, if my understanding is correct about the retooling of the site permit process. i would like to request that the public advisory committee set up its own committee of participants in the process on a daily basis, the stakeholders in other words. i would like them to be in the process of defining what occurs on a day-by-day basis for the movement of the site permit. thank you. that is my request. president murphy: thank you. any further public comments? seeing none, commissioner lee. commissioner lee: after listening to the comments and discussion on this topic, it seems to me one of the stumbling blocks is the department's participation on this committee.

i think a lot of the issues would be resolved or be discussed and answered. i will pose this to the commissioners. is there anything we can do as a commission to help you get these other departments to participate? >> in the future i think what i will do at the public advisory committee is ask the city attorney to attend. because some of these policy changes that people or the commission or public advisory committee think are policy changes are not policy changes. they are state laws that have been ignored by the city of san francisco that we need to impleme implement, such as the request to have an architect sign for the release of his plans for copying. anybody can view plans. that is under the sunshine ordinance. anybody can view anything is a public record. i cannot legally copy plans unless i have a release from the owner of the property and architect. that is state law. i don't have anything to do with that. that is not a san francisco policy. that is state law.

it was not implemented in the san francisco -- or in san francisco. and on the advice -- not on the advice of city attorney but on the process or on the threat of a lawsuit we had to go back and examine state law and examine san francisco's policies. and, yes, we had to change procedures to meet state law. i tphknow that upsets a lot of people but i can't override state law as a director. and it is not a policy decision, that is law. there is a difference between policy and law that i have to implement. it is also like the retention of plans. and we will go with that and i can have the city attorney report on that at the next meeting. so, there are certain things i can't change. i'm willing to change anything that is to the benefit of the customer. it is other issues, other things that drive things that i tried to explain to the public advisory committee and sometimes people hear what they want to hear. i invite the commissioners to

come and sit in the meetings. president murphy: have other jurisdictions such as san jose, l.a., alameda, have they enacted this or been part of it? >> regarding not the retention of plans but regarding the request for an architect signature, yes, that is in the business and professional code. it is on the form. we have worked with the city attorney office on the forms that we need to do. other cities have implemented this. many years ago. in the 1990's. this is something new for san francisco but not new to the building official capacity or state laws. president murphy: what i'm asking, are they doing it in san jose? are they doing it in l.a. and other places? >> they are doing it in other jurisdictions, yes.

president murphy: ok. further comments? commissioner walker? commissioner walker: i think it is important that we listen to the folks using the system as we try to implement. i know that the business reengineering process that we used to help advise around the fifth floor changes are still going on with our first floor, and the inner face with other departments has been the challen challenge. so the comment about six weeks for approving something that seemed relatively easy, many of us on the commission have experienced what happened when there have been some changes with these departments and then our department doesn't catch it and then really late in the game it has to go back to the beginning. so, i think that we are trying to put all of those interfaces

with other departments together at the beginning. so, i think at this point it is really important that we listen to the users around these changes. if the public could be more patient some of this could be resolved with the integration of the i.t. system that is so slow coming out and combining our computer systems and having better access to data. but it has been the problem with our permitting system of things getting lost between departments and us having to continually turn back to the beginning when one department changes something and it affects the whole project. it is a complicated situation and i appreciate the public's input and hope we can resolve that with the further engineering. it is an important meeting rand i think that -- and i think whatever we can do as commissioners to emphasize that

with other department heads i think we will do. that is where we need to resolve the issues. if we could prioritize it, publicize the meetings, who was there, who wasn't. that is one of the points of public information is to make the public aware. i think that will help raise it up to a level of importance. president murphy: thank you. commissioner hechanova. commissioner hechnova: in support of what commissioner walker just mentioned, and in addition, this is one of the really very important interfaces between the public department and other departments associated with the we will process. and this combination of communicati communication, it would be imperative that at least a representative from each public department is there if the category of lack of

representation by the departments is a disservice to the users. they, in turn, the representative for each department, can at least bring to notice quickly to be more responsive to the needs of those that are there because they have a concern about what this advisory committee is supposed to really bring about. if anything, i could probably ask whether how many, if there is a list of public recommendations, is there a list of those recommendations that maybe sometimes become redundant but, more importantly, are we as an advisory committee responding quickly over a very shorter time period as opposed to letting it be reported over and over again during the course of a period of time, whether quarterly or every

six months, to say check off, check off, check off, we have done this. because it seems as if there is the frustration level that is coming about as a result of things aren't being responded to quickly, fast enough, making it sleeker, faster, better. ultimately our service is more important to the category of making it better and more friendly and receptive to the users. president murphy: thank you for your comments. i don't want to sit here and air out dirty laundry or any of that. i want to make a couple of comments. the private sector where i come from i would certainly welcome comments from people, hear what i need to hear rather than hear what i want to hear.

and if people are telling me and bringing me ideas and i constantly am too quick to say no, they are going to stop bringing the ideas to me. sometimes it is black and white, and from running a business or department or whatever you are running, there is a whole lot of gray in between. i think that you have done a very good job, director. but i would love to see a little more openness as far as this committee is concerned and follow the suggestions of the commissioners. any further comments? seeing none, next item. >> number eight discussion and possible action regarding draft

policies concerning d.b.i.'s notification and addressing of properties. >> commissioners, you have before you a draft number one. what i have taken is the original administrative bulletin which is a.b. 035 and tried to update it with current policies and procedures. we already have some comments from the city attorney that need to be incorporated into the document. so there will be a draft number two. you have before you the e-mail from the attorney to myself on that. for the public, there are three typos in there. due to the fact that some of these -- that they are at is an old fashioned term copied from years from 1909 so we will revise that to there on.

there from should be together instead of separated and i did have a typo on begin. i had an eight in there and i will correct those. under renumbering, which the second paragraph, the city attorney suggests to add the sentence that failure to do so, this is -- the whole paragraph reads if a property is tenant occupied the property owner must also submit documentation acceptable to the building official that all tenants have been notified of the proposed street number change request. then the city attorney is asked to add failure to do so shall result in revocation or denial of any such request for renumbering. president murphy: is there a time limit on the notification? 30 days? 60 days? >> no. in other words, before the change request can be submitted

to the department, that letter of notification has to be attached with the submittal document before the change, the request for change will even be considered. in other words, the property owner will have to notify the tenants i would like to khaeuch your address from apartment 123 to apartment abc, and they have to notify the tenants. and we are going to have a form that the tenants would be able to sign saying they have been notified. president murphy: so the burden of responsibility is on the landlord or property owner to notify the tenant? >> yes. president murphy: ok. >> we won't accept the application for the request for the change unless that documentation is submitted with the request. president murphy: ok. any comments? commissioner walker: i want to thank the director for putting this in writing and khaeufrg our

situation. -- clarifying our situation. i think all of us have responded and heard members of the public who are at the effect of these changes without knowing about it until it is too late and that creates a lot of problems for our process. i appreciate this notice and process being delineated. i think it will go a long way toward resolving some of -- we heard from jose morales who has experienced too late a number change in his apartment and i think this is a really good resolution. i want to thank you for that very much. and the department. president murphy: further comments? public comments? mr. morales.

>> do you want the overhead? president murphy: it looks like we have quite a few speakers so i will be real rigid on the lee-minulee tka- lee--- three-minute rul--- thre- three-minute rule.--- three-minute rule. -- three-minute rule.-- three-minute rule. three-minute rule. three-minute rule. >> good morning, commissioners. i'm jose morales.

first i would like to request that three minutes would be enough for me, but if i could request three minutes later on i will be very happy. but if i use six minutes now it is also ok? but since i was the one that initiated this discussion, as the main presenter i would like -- president murphy: i would like to say before you go any further you have three minutes. there will be no further three minutes granted. >> thank you. thank you for that. for this to be applied it requires withdrawal of all the units from the building.

in this case, the owners did not withdraw number 572-a. and when they realized that there was a mistake, instead of rectifying it, they substituted that number for that illegal number, 574, which was obtained for the brand-new unit to be constructed on the third floor. and they did this to surprise the authorities in the city. the process of the eviction, when it was taken, was done and

became number and -- null and void. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlord null and void. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlord null and void. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlonull and void. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlo null and voi. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlo null and voi. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlord null and v. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlonull and void. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlord null and v. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlo null and voi. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlord null and v. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlo null and voi. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlo null and voi. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlo null and voi. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlordnull and vo. for that reason i'm appealing because the landlord committed fraud with a purpose of evicting me from my home of 43 years. also, i ask you to please correct the number from 574, which is still in the building, and that should be corrected according to ab 035 which is one

of our codes. what could be more simple than using that code to do justice? because that number was not supposed to be there because that was not a real number. it is an insult, it's not right. so, this was the first permit. and i have all the documents in the computer in the d.b.i. building. and before i lose this great opportunity, this is a simple case where i get to show you in a minute where i obtained this. [bell] >> may i have one minute? president murphy: next speaker,

please. >> i would like to limit my comments to two minutes and give him one of mine. >> thank you. president murphy: counsel, can we do that? no, we cannot do that. three minutes per speaker. next speaker, please. >> any way the number 574. >> i will start the time. >> thank you. jose, stay here if i need you. i work with the community living campaign. i want to thank you for addressing this issue commissioners and director day. i think it is important the way you clarify the language in the administrative code here. i think it is good it includes clarification about notification and steps up that process. it is also important you are now giving notice to the residents because they are partners in this when you change the address

because they have to change their checks, mailing address, all their legal documents. they also can be your partner in terms of enforcement. i want to make two comments. one has to do with the grief and aggravation jose suffered. we would hope something for the fewer comes out of -- future comes out of this. there is one more thing to clarify. in his situation you had a permit request for new construction, you had a permit request to change the address. they came in together. at some point the permit for the construction died. it was not approved. it went away. you have the other permit. the question is, you know, that is what created the confusion. it is not clear what that number relates to, if it came in with the construction. somehow when you clarify this, if the issue is a permit coming in with construction and there is not a certificate of completion on the construction, that number really shouldn't go

into effect or there needs to be some way to clarify. even your documents have different addresses for this location now. the point is to make it clear for everybody, property owner and public. if you could make that change. the last thing really is we hope this gets put into practice. it still doesn't address what happened going back in jose's case. he asked for a hearing and had not received one or formal notification about why he was not given a hearing. if any questions for jose or i, i have a minute left. or jose, anything you would like me to say on your behalf? >> [inaudible] i was supposed to

have these penalties. why can't that be complied with? why? it was the law. >> do you have any questions or comments for us or actually i would be interested in hearing if you see a way to add the clarification about when it is tied to a permit. thank you. president murphy: next speaker, please. >> [speaking spanish]