bomb. you know the first reaction is going to be, i got a permit. the better you do that job, you are also providing another permit for small and businesses. >> next speaker please. >> i liked the suggestion of having dothe dbi. we have the legislation that could potentially trigger mandatory. most people do not realize there is such thing as a structural exercise only.

is untitled 24 -- it is titled 24 construction cost reagan most people will realize that should take care of their requirements, but it does not. people need to be notified and informed. accessibility is a much more complicated they, dense if you have to deal with it, you are going to have today and the accessibility consultant to help you. i appreciate the efforts to put

this out there. this is a constant effort. outreach is crucial. >> any further public comments. next item. >> and next item is item number eight, commissioners comments. . >> what i see is some category of notification davis -- notification, and we are seeing how they are notified on whether they have made efforts of meeting compliance as a general note. >> we have talked to the tax of treasurer's office of ways of

doing this, and their preference is not to do so, because they want to use the to communicate with business. our office is making a commitment as part of on going out to reach. -- out of reach. the office will be provided in our office and with all of this. our office will be sending a welcome level, -- welcome

letter. there are other things the businesses do not always get informed of. let us know, and we will help you through this. >> one radical concept is when you sell a property, you have to disclose a certain amount of information in terms of the components of the building. you have to disclose accessibility issues with the properties as a condition of sale.

>> public comments are closed. next item. >> item #8, this item will allow the commissioners to provide closing comments to the joint meeting. >> comments from the commissioners? we have public comments on that. seeing none. >> item #9 is the general public comment which will allow members of the public to suggest new agenda items for consideration. >> public comments?

three minutes. >> i am from the college of irresponsible growth. -- of the responsible growth. i heard the president start opening remarks with what i understood to be speaking about education and discovery, and you have taken us on a roller coaster of information, and i would like to thank you and all the speakers who brought information. as i was listening, i kept going

from here to another place, another country, another state, perhaps another clennon -- perhaps another planet, and i wonder what i might be thinking there. i could come up with only words such as grotesque, unbelievable, bizarre, and unprecedented. you have within your power the gift of changing that, because the customer is unhappy with how things are, and you must change it. i know you are planning and thinking about that, because if

you do not, san francisco and will not be a place where people will want to do business. they will want to live here for many reasons but not do business, and that is unthinkable. this is the year of the golden robert -- rabbit, and i understand what one wishes for will come true, and my wish is that you make san francisco a better place to do business. thank you. >> any further public comment bowman -- public comment? seeing none, next item. >>-#10, new business allows future consideration for a joint

commission meetings. >> i just thought are worried and roll it in one. i would like to thank you for being here tonight. a great big cross and -- agreed they thank you to the commissioners for being here. for new business going forward, as we mentioned at the outset, we hope to have the planning department involved, and perhaps in the next meeting we will condense the items into something smaller and to dig deeper and make everything

better for the future. just a reminder we will hopefully have that as soon as possible. i know staff will get working on that, and thank you, and everybody's. >> i wonder if we can include the health department for the process for restaurant food service to have somebody be of assistance for that. >> absolutely. can you make a note of that? >> wasn't there one point where you said we could have a central location? >> we talked about that.

we can certainly put that on the agenda item as well. something like the environmental exemption would be something justified as taking up, because it is so complicated. suddenly when you have three minutes to speak, and now you make one point or three points, and you finish in a minute. i think it should be coming out in future discussion. we definitely want to make a point of fact. commissioner clyde: with

specific topics that are very -- for planning, wouldn't it be possible to meet jointly and discuss the mark could that be of a proposal to have a small working group between planning and the small business commission? >> i think that is a great idea. i think we will have to consult with legal. i am understanding, a working group set would be commissioners across the commission.

>> commissioners from a different commission but a working group. >> i think that is a great idea of a. i think we should check to make sure we are not violated any legal rules or laws on that your good -- on that. >> i would like to thank my colleagues and commissioners from small business. i would also like to thanks staff for coming tonight and of course public comments. i think it is agreed that you set your and are concerned about what goes on at these hearings, -- it is great that you are concerned about what goes on at these hearings.

that is it for me. >> is there any public comment on item number 10? seeing none, we can move to item number 11, adjournment reagan moved to adjourn? >> seconded -- adjournment. move to adjourn? >> second. >> we are now adjourn.

>> good morning. today is thursday, february 3, 2011. this is a special meeting of the building inspection commission. at this time, ask everyone to turn off all electronic devices.

the first item on the agenda is roll call. [roll call] commissioner lee is excuse, and commissioner romero is expected. we have a quorum. before we begin, i would like to announce that item 6 regarding 565 marina boulevard is being removed from the agenda. we will take public comment under the item when it comes up. item two, president's announcements. commissioner murphy: he may not

be able to make it. >> any public comment on the president's announcement? item three, public comment. the bic will take public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda. seeing none, we move to item four, reports, discussion, and possible action to approve the proposed budget of the department of building inspection for fiscal year 2011/2012. >> pamela leaven, deputy director of administrative services. i have a brief presentation, and then i'll take questions. the meeting will be the 16th of february, and the budget is

actually due to the mayor's office on the 22nd. i just had a couple of slides to put up, and i gave you guys copies. i wanted to just start by looking at priorities in terms of funding for this next fiscal year. the first one is to continue to restore the number of positions. the proposed #of positions exceeds the 2009-2010 level. i was looking at the budget today and looking at the big line items. 57% of our proposed budget is personnel costs, so i will go over that, but that is the highest priority.

the second is the growing demand for permanent inspection services. technology improvements benefit customer service and provide transparency. these are in the vpr report as being the priorities that were set when that was done. we have to ensure that they are cost recovering, improve service delivery, and to improve the fiscal health of the department. i always like to start with revenue. i know this does not project very well, but that is why you have a copy of it. the green line is the revenues. they are the intergovernmental

agreements that we have with transbay to do plan reviews and inspections. we are going to do some items, very small items for the port. those are the major items, so i was trying to separate those ongoing revenues that are the meat and potatoes from the mou's, and we are projecting a in terms of growth a small increase. we do not really know what is going to come through the pipeline. we are getting -- people come into the development unit and ask.

they are canceling their plans out. we are building our budget to show a small increase, and those increases are in what we call charges per services. it is not that we are having the fees go up. it is not that we are having any of the charges go up. it is the revenue from things like building inspection, plan review. you can see that we are doing quite well in terms of our revenues over what we were worried about when the economy was bad, but as i said, we are trying to be realistic in terms of our projection. commissioner murphy: can i ask a question? what is our balance? >> the balance is about 54 days,

so it is about -- if all revenue stops because of an emergency, we could sustain about 54 days of expenses. commissioner murphy: we could bear those for 54 days? >> no, that is only paying salaries. i was thinking this morning about what other kinds of expenses we would have, and eventually, a lot of expenses -- in personnel, only over time is reimbursed, so we would have to eat the rest, but there are some property expenses that are minor. during the broadway rockslide, we did barricades'. we did geotechnical services we had to pay for. there is kind of a gamma --

gamut. i think there is something that had to do with the wood for shoring. that would feed into that 54 days, so we are much better off than we were several years ago. even last year, we started off with -- commissioner murphy: how are we compared to three years ago? >> three years ago, -- we are greater than three years ago. our lowest was 500,000 that we went into 2009-2010 with. we went in with $553,000, and we are up to wear around between 3 million or 4 million. remember, years and years ago -- commissioner murphy: i remember. >> yes. commissioner murphy: let's get

back to the first page there. it says, "restore code enforcement outreach for the sro programs to levels prior to the downturn." can you explain that a little bit to me? what were the levels then? how much money were we giving them then, and how much money are we giving them now? >> you are talking about actually the report. several years ago, i think three years ago, we were giving them $750,000 into the sro. then, that that decrease, and the reason that the decrease was that was an add back by the mayor.

i do not know if you have ever been to hearings, but everything slides really quickly, so what happened was when we were balancing our budget, it was 750,000, and this brings us back to that. it is consistent with -- when i say it is to restore to those levels, we have been doing that with a lot of the rest of the budget. we thought it was prudent. >> the idea within the department is that we are financially ok? we can start spending again? it seems to me like apart from five or six big projects that are starting in san francisco or have started, we have some big checks.

the small permits have not increased that much, or at least that is what i'm hearing from the stakeholders out there. is there any truth to that? could you confirm, the night? >> i can answer that question. we have actually seen in increase in the smaller homeowner permits. not so much the contractor permits, but the homeowner permits are coming in more. people doing more kitchen and bath remodels on their own. not so much with the contractors. we are issuing about 95% of our permits over the counter, and they are busy from 8:00 in the morning until 5:00 at night with people waiting, so we are busy, and they are issuing permits. i can give you at the next meeting the actual figures.

contractor vs -- versus homeowner versus developer. commissioner murphy: i would like some facts on that at our next meeting. when we get down the page a little further, the disaster recovery unit. >> right. this is being dictated by the various events, like these 10 or 12 committees that are involved with the disaster recovery, and they have asked us to form a unit. the building inspector -- was it two building inspectors? the unit will consist of at least two building inspectors with a disaster coordinator and that the person. we are attending between six or

eight meetings a month on disaster coordination throughout the city without the implementation of the mayor's director for the new committee on the mandatory program, so we need to reform the unit. it is not a new unit. we have any emergency preparedness team at one point. it was disbanded when we had to start making the cuts in 2008- 2009, and we need to reform the unit and get it back into operation. we have been told that we cannot get grant money to do this, and the department did -- how can i say it -- find a position or two positions in the past. what we're going to do with this unit -- it is going to be funded by the strong motion earthquake fee fund that is set aside for just this type of work. commissioner murphy: i understand that. i just want the other

commissioners that are not familiar with it to hear about it. i know we have the command center and trailer and all that. i'm just asking a question. that is all. >> when you roll the budget up, there is a lot of things that are not jumping out at me, but there is an abatement of reimbursement backing up those expenses along the top, so that we are prepared. commissioner murphy: can we go a little further down the page? improved plan review. how much is this construction on the first floor lobby area -- how much is that going to cost? >> -- >>