dealing with. for instance, the tracking system for being able to call up and scheduled an appointment for an inspection. that would be under inspection services, primarily. if there is a problem with that, we may need to get information from the mis area. when it comes to the questions of developmental units, bill might transfer them to the city. or the mayor would come to us and collect the information to go back to the individual. >> how long does that normally take? to get back to an individual? >> for the most part it takes a couple of days, maximum. there are some complicated

issues that people bring in that cross a lot of divisions and are things that people are working on. and there are some questions about different types of permits that are being issued and how something is handled on planned reviews. it involves a lot more than the straight forward. it might take several days. usually it is pretty fast. >> so, it gets funneled through you and goes back out again? >> it depends on whether or not i need to see it again. i try to keep track of what is going on so that i can keep the director and formed of the issues in the department. and i make sure that things make sense when they go back out.

but they do not typically have to be held up because i am in a meeting or anything like that. >> community fairs are a part of this our reach. that is part of what you are overseeing? >> yes. >> thank you. >> um, so i am looking at -- i think that i got my questions answered about the programs that we run through housing. there was a discrepancy that has been sufficiently explained to me to make sure that we have full funding for that. i agreed on the issues of public outreach. also, training. i think that some of the issues around housing, clearly we are

the eyes out in the city. making sure that we have sufficient training to make sure that staff is carrying forward what we expect of them and what we are counting on them to do. planning issues clearly. we have got some real responsibilities that have been placed on our staff. without adequate training, i think that all of this support in both of those regards -- we have got a lot of changes coming in the system. we have new codes that we are implementing. as well as some, hopefully, strong programs.

if there is a way that we could work with other departments to help fund things, this would be a good time to do it. there are a lot of changes. >> with that the additional funding being added for training, there is almost one- quarter of $1 million. >> do you know how much that is up from last year? >> when i was putting it into the system, it was up by $90,000. this -- the idea is to have it across different sections as needed. making sure that we are keeping up on the emerging issues. >> thank you. commissioner clinch: can you explain -- i'm not familiar with the strong motion fund. is that state or city? >> it is a fee required by the

state, of which we keep a small portion, and the rest gets transferred back up to the state. it is for emergency seismic disasters sort of training and issues. essentially, the whole project that started. it is also a long-term project, funded by strong motion. this is what we will use for our disaster recovery unit. the idea is that we need to keep up with the other activities that we are required to do by the mayor's office and the department of emergency management to plan and, you know, go through exercises and

then we actually prepare for kind of the inevitable issues that we are going to have in this region. we not only have budgeted positions. we also have budgeted the emergency supply so that we can make sure we have adequate, you know, materials and supplies in our -- what is called the doc, which is the department operations center, and that we have access to, and that we keep recycling, if you will, because things take time out. we feel that, you know, it is a good use of that funding, and so, that is basically how it works. commissioner clinch: have you collected permit applications? >> it is an additional charge that we have to collect on permits. every time you come in, you pay

a strong motion fee. as i said, we have to return it on a quarterly basis -- some of it -- back to the state. just one of those things. [laughter] we also have other state- mandated fees. commissioner hechanova: if my math serves me right, on inspection services where payments from other departments have sort of -$25,000, is that reflected in those numbers under sub total? then, when i look at the permit services side, where payments from other departments are subtracted from services from other departments, the sub total -- the subtotal is not consistent. >> can you tell me what page you are on? commissioner hechanova: on the

summary, next inspection services at the top. services of other departments. 2010-2011. then payments from other departments. it reflects their the sub total -- it reflects there the s ubtotal. >> what happens is this -- it is a really weird way of doing the accounting. what happens is -- commissioner hechanova: that is the part i do not understand. it is weird, and i'm reading numbers directly, and when i look at the next page, the $114,880 on payments from other departments are not -- are subtracted from and shown on the sub total. >> let me tell you how this

works. instead of taking -- i will give you an example. i'm going to pay you to do my vehicle maintenance. instead of me reflecting my payment to you as a revenue, you are reflecting it as a rejection to expenses, so you spend $114,000, and then, i give you $114,000, and you update the expense. instead of showing it as revenue, we show it as a reduction to expense. it is the way that the internal service department is doing it. internal services are department of technology, central services, that sort of thing. we are not in -- so, if i'm

understanding -- since there are also services of other departments, and that is -- so the first one is from your perspective -- the first one is i'm paying you to do something, and the second perspective is you are paying somebody else to do something. you are paying department of technology to do something, and the services of other departments, so payments are shown as a reduction to expenses, and services were shown as an ex so we are not -- we are going up by $31,000 for services of other departments. we are not changing payments of other departments, so that is why it is zero. it is still -$25,000. so there is no change between each year.

does that -- am i getting -- or are you saying that the subtotal is not taking into account? commissioner hechanova: yes, that is the part i'm not tracking correctly or properly in your accounting system. where it is reflected -- not reflected in the subtotal for inspection services, but on permit services, and it does get subtracted out. >> i see. ok. so -- commissioner hechanova: that is the part of the creative accounting here that i do not follow. again, those are only the bracket type of numbers that i could at least see where are the sum total, where they are reflected or not reflected, and if not, why. >> ok, so, i'm trying to do things really -- commissioner hechanova:

similarly on materials and supplies, the variants there. there is a significant jump from the 2010/2011 to 2011/2012, over $100,000. but let's get back to both permit services and services to the other departments that are not reflected consistently on the sub total. -- subtotal. >> sorry, i'm trying to do some math quickly. so when you add up the 2010-

2011, when you take the 3.425, and the 97,000, - the 25,000, i get the $3,497,000. but i do think -- i do understand -- i think what you're saying is -- when you take an ad the $3.4 million plus the $5.0 million, plus the 100 to -- you are saying it does not equal the $14 million? is that basically what you are -- commissioner hechanova: repeat again? >> when you take the sub total of each of those, it does not

include, it is not the 14 -- commissioner hechanova: yes. it should be, i guess. >> does or does not? i did not bring a calculator -- >> i have one. go on to something else. >> let me explain on the materials and supplies and to the disaster coordination unit, that is the stars and fringes and materials and supplies where it will go from 120 to 557, with the growth of 437,000 -- is that -- commissioner hechanova: at the bottom is the next page on technical support.

>> the number comes out the same. it does equal that. commissioner hechanova: but the huge jump -- i guess that is my other question on materials and supplies. >> let's start with your question on premise services. under technical support, it does go from 136 to 10,000, under materials and supplies. that issue is because materials and supplies included the code books bought for the whole department based on the state code changes that occurred in january 2011. we do not need to buy as many code books, and therefore, that is the drop. ok, on -- you had a question on inspection services, on materials and supplies? commissioner hechanova: know,

the payments from other departments. >> the payments from other departments under inspection services? >> yes. >> they stayed the same period commissioner hechanova: -- they stayed the same. commissioner hechanova: why would there be -- and i guess this is where your explanation of straight line accounting of paying for services and an expense that then becomes zeroed out would be for payments from other departments, right? >> that third column is barry in. if there is no change between 25 and 25, there's not any change at all. inspection services, one of these is for -- i think it is, like, $10,000 for geotechnical services that is provided by dpw, and instead of us having

our own contract for geotechnical services, in the event that we have something like the broadway rockslide again, that is the budget. and we always -- the actuals are always based on what the actual expenditures are, so they do not -- they are not allowed to bill us any more than what they actually spend, and we are not allowed to pay them for more than what they actually spent, but there is no variants on services from other departments. the reason it is up on the top and not under the various -- you know, not under building inspection, not a disaster, not electric, not plumbing, is because we budgeted the high level for work orders, and this is part of the work order thing. you know, last year, we talked about showing the revenue

because technically, in the real world, anywhere else, probably other than san francisco, this is revenue. but here, it is the reduction to expenses. the expenses may be incurred anywhere within the division, and it may be anything. it may be salaries. we made to work for someone else and they pay us. but it is all accumulated in one line, and it is problematic the way it looks, and we thought about doing it as a revenue. if you do it as a revenue, it does not match the financial system, and, you know, being asked a budget person, i want this stuff to match every month so i can make sure i did it right. i apologize for the way this is portrayed. commissioner hechanova: 94 your

explanation. commissioner murphy: -- thank you for your explanation. commissioner murphy: a lot of the questions i was going to ask have been asked and answered. how much money are we spending on the name change? >> at this point, we anticipate it will be minimal at best because all of the documents that we do have the ability to change on the fly in the computer. we may need to do some as we go through, change some business cards, which we have to pay reproduction for, but those are, you know, minimal -- commissioner murphy: so we can say that it is a done deal? >> with the charter amendment, it requires -- commissioner murphy: that is one

of the things i would like to [inaudible] updated every month on that. [inaudible] i would like to have a number of employees. in the past, we usually got that. then, commissioner walker mentioned planning staff. i would like to be a little more specific on when that money is being spent, what staff is going to be spent on where, some

detail on that. that would be nice. and is there -- i'm sure this is a little bit off the agenda, but with the project we talk about back in september, has that project, in? have we got fees for that yet? do we know? >> that is the first project that actually went through the development fee unit. there is a hole in the ground, and they are working on the project. commissioner murphy: what about whole foods and ocean avenue? >> we have not collected all the fees do for that project. thing to submit the agenda as we speak. we have addressed both of those properties, so they are in the works right now.

commissioner murphy: and has there ever been any discussion on maybe putting some funds aside for the packed meeting for following up and getting back to the stakeholders, following through with what they were asking for? >> that really is not an expense to the department. we can do that with existing staff so there really would not be any expense on it. we do send out the minutes. the minutes are online. are you talking about updating the website? >> and also, getting the minutes over the [inaudible] see them at the commission meeting. >> we can certainly provide an to the commission. they are provided online every month. commissioner murphy: i would

like to get a copy. >> definitely. >> as they go out, i could for them to you. commissioner murphy: appreciate that. yes, the cash management and charts, how soon is that going to be implemented? it is down here at the bottom of page four. one of the major outcomes of the project is enabling [inaudible] transaction without leaving their desks, waiting to process the transaction. [inaudible] especially when the new project

tracking system is implemented. persons will be mounted at each desk used in swiping checks and credit cards, and they can expect that the accuracy of the transactions will be [inaudible] revenues will be less [inaudible] how soon will that be implemented? >> we are working with the treasurer tax collector, and piggybacking on their rfp, which they have already issued. they have already negotiated their contract. the contract right now as of last week was sitting with the city attorney's office. once that is approved, we have already contacted the vendor, and they have said that they can do what we are asking them to

do, but i do not have at this point in time a definitive calendar. but when i do, i will be glad to share with you. commissioner murphy: that is one clerk, i believe, on the fifth floor? >> on the fifth floor, we have added 3.85 fte's, which is roughly five heads. commissioner murphy: what is that by sbe? >> an fte is a full-time equivalent, and that this -- i will not bore you with the math, but essentially, what it means is that we cannot hire people on july 1. we hire people after -- i think it is 9 pay periods. that says that the 77% to the

end up -- so it is the ninth pay period until the 26, what is represented here. when you figure out how many heads it is, you divide by 0.77, and you get roughly -- and i think this is about five, six positions, but i want to point out -- commissioner murphy: at any given time, there would be five clerks. is that what you're saying? >> no, i'm saying these are new positions. and the majority of the new positions are in permit services, and they can be used -- in fact, any of the clerks could be used technically on any of the floors to provide services that they need to be, so you have a lot of -- because of the requirements, you have similar requirements within the

same classification, so you have some flexibility to be able to meet your needs that occurs at that given time. commissioner murphy: [inaudible] has that situation improved, or do we need to put more money into it? [inaudible] maybe the director would want to answer that. >> i can answer that. yes, we have transferred people from the second floor of to the fifth floor and have cross train people on the second floor to go up to the fifth floor if there is a need for extra people up there. you also have to realize we have to balance the need throughout the department where we have services we render on every floor, so i cannot completely

strip one floor of clerks to have them all on the fifth floor and have no clerks on the first floor. we are addressing that, and we have in this budget added another five positions for permit services to be able to do this, to cross train and be able to help with the work load. >> how many are there now, including this new -- >> 5. on the fifth floor right now, there are 12 clerks on the fifth floor. >> and then we are adding five? >> we are adding five between the two floors. three will be going to the third floor and two to the second. >> but they can be crossed? >> they will be cross train. >commissioner murphy: any given time on the fifth floor, i was told that there is 5.5 clerks. people out on leave doing what people do. the complaint has been for a

long time, and i've mentioned it many times that commission meetings, they [inaudible] -- the guy that writes a check, the homeowner, has to wait in line for hours. i would like the situation changed, and if it means adjusting the budget or whatever, do that. they fund it. >> it looks like we are adding five, so the question would be, president murphy, do you think that is sufficient? commissioner murphy: it probably is sufficient. i do not know. i do not work in the department. i just look at what the stakeholders say. maybe i will be getting different feedback on the now.