are discussing it. >> i think it came up a year- and-a-half ago. if there is a gray water system and we have a permit, we are able to look at it and have some fun of documentation so if a complaint or something arises, we can go back to that information and see that. without it, it is very hard. without the permit, you should not have those kinds of problems. hopefully, it is not a lot of water going in the backyards, but if it becomes an issue, finding out will be difficult on our in. with the permit systems, having that information, if a complaint does arise and it is in the back yard or away from home, we are able to go back and look and say that we have a laundry landscape, bathroom to landscape, a gray water system going into this back yard. we would be able to go back and look that up and investigate from their and then do the corrective actions and notify both party owners of what is happening. commissioner lee: typically, you say that the system should not -- we would prefer that they did

not leak into the neighbor's yard. >> definitely. we do not want anything from one property going into the next property. commissioner clinch: regarding the soils information, i think it is great that someone acknowledged that there may be soils reports available for the adjacent property that could be used, but who will make the determination that it is appropriate for this? because that takes some technical understanding. >> there would have to be a guideline set up for exactly how it will be done. that would be something that we would put together and have for that person that is doing that. that is over the counter, to say that it is or is not an issue. >> commissioners? any other questions? i just want to thank the inspector for being involved in this, and we would like to stay

involved in it. i think it is important for us to communicate with puc and other policymakers. we want to support the gray water initiatives in san francisco, but we also want to make sure they are done safely and that it does not infringe upon other properties and cause other problems later. commissioner walker: the part about being able to identify certain areas that are going to trigger issues -- i think that is an important issue, especially as we experienced the water rise that we know is coming. if there is a way that we could make -- you know, pay more attention to those or a process that catches those, i think that would be helpful. commissioner murphy: that is great that you are willing to

help the public and advise them on it. very important that it is kept as inexpensive as possible. homeowners are not going to be able to afford a soil report. it costs all kinds of money, and they are not going to go there, and they are just going to go into their own system. if we keep the money out of it, then you're going to get people that will come for advice on how to do with the correct way. that is how i see it. >> you talked about the gray water and the price. there are other things happening with storm water, collection, rain barrels used for landscape in this as well. again, if that is something coming in, somebody doing a great water system and rainbow system, combining that, that saves a lot of money and time, and we are able to help them out as much as possible. commissioner murphy: great. that is a good idea. thank you very much. >> public comment on items six?

then item seven, discussion and possible action regarding a proposed administrative proposedab-084 guidelines for the structural review of continuous tied down systems used to resist overturning of light-framed would shear walls in response to comments from the building inspection commission. then i guess, you have before you a recommendation from our code advisory committee that this ab-047, which is the specifics of middle reports special inspections and file exceptions of smokey joe's systems, smokeyab-084, guidelines for structural review of continuous tied down systems used to resist overturning of light-framed with sheer walls, have been approved,vetted by the code advisory committee and

forwarded to the commission for your approval. commissioner walker: are we taking items seven and eight together? >> i would like to. item eight was formed in conjunction with the fire department, and we have the fire marshal year to help -- here to help explain a little bit about the guidelines. >> quickly on items seven, this was before us a few months ago. i have some comments from the committee. >> can you go over those comments and the resolution of them for us as a structural engineer? >> i cannot remember exactly. there was a concern about the fact that they had used some terminology referring to the need for posts. when you do need some sort of vertical compression element

adjacent to the tiedown, which will have a counter action force in the wall. that was one of the comments. i have forgotten -- i think there was a total of three comments, but we have gone back three months ago. needless to say, i feel like we have discussed the issues. they removed some wording and added some. commissioner murphy: what has changed from the previous system? >> this is to allow the use of the continuous tension rods systems, which are say which between studs as opposed to a more traditional hold down. these are more continuous. not to advocate one system over

another, but they tend to be cleaner and simpler to install, and you do not have problems with old lining up in the right place and having to do a lot of drilling into the post to have the holddown be installed properly. any other comments or questions? commissioner walker: could we hear from the fire marshal? thank you for coming this morning. >> it is a pleasure to be here. i am just here to let you all know that the fire department has worked with the code advisory committee for a number of years on the smoke control bulletin. we feel is necessary. we are happy with the wording, and the code advisory committee was also happy in the end. it is a necessary document that smoke control systems are complicated systems, required in all new high-rise buildings and in some other buildings,

specialty occupancies, but they involve many different disciplines -- sprinkler systems, fire alarm systems, architectural elements of the building, mechanical systems -- and they require a lot of coordination between the various trades and making sure that all these various systems of comply with the smoke control report. this document will give guidance to designers to know what is required for these of middle and approval of these systems. -- for the submittal and approval of the systems. commissioner lee: any other questions? public comment? -- commissioner hechanova: other questions? public comment? >> seeing that, item nine -- >> do we need to approve? i move to approve administrative bulletins or support or whatever

the language is, both 7 and 8. commissioner murphy: second. commissioner hechanova: the motion has been moved and seconded. commissioner walker: yes. commissioner lee: yes. commissioner mar: yes. commissioner murphy: yes. commissioner clinch: yes. >> the motion passes. item nine, directors report. 9a, update on dbi's finances. >> pamela levin. there is not any real remarkable difference between our projection from last month to this month. the revenues come in strongly. primarily, the revenues are in charge for services, but there are the licenses -- the apartment licenses and hotel licenses that come in with the

property tax have come in a little stronger than we expected. and we are still showing savings in several areas of expenditures and ending up with a year-end balance similar to last year -- i mean last month. i will be happy to answer any questions. commissioner murphy: have we brought back any new people in the last 30 days? >> we have brought back one payroll per cent, but the mayor's office has released the rest of our requisitions except for the housing inspector positions, so we will be posting those positions up on our website, and those are mostly clerical positions at this point. we are in the process of hiring

could we will mechanical engineers. they did interview for that position on monday, and i believe there are offers being made in that field, and we are interviewing for one structural engineer, and that will take place next week for the civil engineer. >> we also in the last 30 days had interviews for electrical inspectors. requisitions have been approved, but now everything is in dhr. commissioner walker: i have a question. maybe it has been answered in previous reports, but the seismic retrofitting budget and our actual are significantly different. were we estimating more people would be taking advantage of a voluntary retrofitting program? >> yes, but that is not in this funding. we had -- i do not have the figures of how many permits have

been issued, but it is a small amount. commissioner walker: it is underperforming what we anticipated we would be getting as a result of the voluntary program? that is a good thing to look at because it is pretty significant. being under revenue, just for that particular thing. >> we can report back on that. >> is there any public comment on item 9a? seeing none, -- oh. >> good morning. member of the san francisco

coalition for responsible growth. i just want to commend you for the to stop you will be hauling, began with the electrical, because we have been behind and we have been trying to get appointments with them. like the building department, which are great. we usually get those with about 24 hours, but you do not get that too often with anybody else, so again, just wanted to say thank you and commend you for getting this on. we really wanted to commend you. thank you. >> i have included in your package a proposed ordinance that has not been introduced yet, but i wanted to bring it to your attention. it is regarding the public art fee adn pub -- and public artwork trust fund. this would be similar to the

development legislation passed last year that would require dbi to collect and monitor the fee and the actual installation before we sign off on a final certificate of occupancy. i have worked with both the public arts commission and the planning department on this legislation, and we are in agreement with the concept to make it easier for people or developers to pay all of their fees in one general location, so we are working very closely with this and monitoring it very closely. commissioner walker: this is of particular interest to me. i chaired the san francisco arts council where we discussed the issue, made recommendations that they do some of what they are doing. in the c3 area downtown, there is an art development fee in all

private developments. 1% goes to create art on-site. the problem is that nobody manages this. nobody has any idea what actual pieces of art are actually created as a result of this. and this actually goes a step further in allowing for wider use within the framework of the money where it can actually be used not just for creating artwork on the site, but space for arts activity and maintenance, i believe, of public art. there is still conversations about this. i personally, of course, would like to see the district expanded to be able to accommodate more arts focus

funding. just as an fyi, our public developments, anything we do as a public building, requires a 2% contribution to this fund for arts either on site, and if this is passed, eventually, it would be for art space and maintenance of that facility. this is a good thing because i think it will give us the ability to manage and determine what is being done under this program. so i thank you for working with them. commissioner hechanova: any other comments or questions on this issue? commissioner murphy: there is no additional cost to developers on this? >> correct. >> is there any public comment on 9b? 9c, update on permit tracking systems. >> deputy director of

administrative services. i wanted to update you on the progress of the permit tracking system procurement. i have asked this morning our person that i have been dealing with at the hrc to attend the meeting in case you have questions for him. so he is also here. i am pleased to announce that we have now submitted or sent out a notice of intent to award a contract to acella government software and 21 tech, which is a minority-owned firm. the issue is that there is a five-day protest period, in

which any vendor that has submitted a proposal who believes that they should have been selected and they have sufficient documentation of a violation of the city process or ordinance or law -- they can submit a protest. this is something we work with the city attorney's office if and when that occurs, but they have five days to do that. we then begin negotiating the contract with the vendor that was issued the intent to award. as you know, we want to have a contract by august. the vendor knows that we want to aggressively seek execution of a contract. i believe that it is feasible, and we have, as far as i am

concerned, made a lot of progress over the last couple of months to get a product that can truly serve our needs. i do not know if you have any questions. >> what was the date of issuing the intent to issue? >> it was this last monday, before 12:00. so is this following monday. next monday at noon that they have to have their protest in. commissioner lee: i just want to say thank you for keeping us abreast, especially this chart on the progress. this is very helpful. >> we will be working on, kind of dissecting the process between now and the consummation of the contract. so we are not just saying between now and the contract we are not going to update you. we will continue to update you on a monthly basis.

commissioner murphy: thanks for that report. what about our semantic systems we have? we have all these monitors up on the wall, but nothing seems to be working. it was supposed to be implemented by the first of the year. >> the schematic system, we are still doing. there have been some suggestions by staff of changes in processes, and we are working that out, plus doing the final training. the equipment works. it is just a matter of -- commissioner murphy: why is it working? >> e-mail why have we not implemented? we are working with staff right now to find and the processes of getting the people to the right stations at the right time to make sure that the computer system itself realizes the fact that they need to go to the next station that is available rather than the next station that is on the list in the priority list. staff have come up with some

suggestions. we have also had some trial runs with actual applicants going through the system, and they have made some suggestions. we have configured the software a little bit differently in -- that was originally configured. we hope by the next meeting we should have an out. we have everything ready to go. we have the numbers for the stations ready to go. it is just the last fine-tuning and making sure we do not put something out there that is not going to work. >> and we want to honor -- commissioner murphy: the only concern i have is that i was told it would be up and running by the first of the year. here we are coming up to june and still not running. i am just concerned that we are dragging our feet here. >> i think it is really important to honor the suggestions of staff in making the process work and being able to do that when it is actually

implemented instead of going back and forth after it is a implemented, and staff has been extremely interested in providing, you know, when we first had training, they really wanted things to be in a way that made sense to them that they could support and they could have the by end, and having buy into a project is extremely crucial for success. commissioner murphy: i understand. i appreciate that. is it all one system? >> the bottom floor feeds into the fifth floor, and the fourth floor is separate, right? no, the first floor controls -- you can go into the first floor and get a ticket for any floor, whether it is the first floor, the fourth floor, or the fifth floor right now. those are the only floors on the schematic system.

you can go to the fifth floor and get a ticket. the fourth floor you have to go to the first floor to get a ticket. the software is multitasking, based on each floor, but it is integrated, so the processes have to be integrated across the department, and that has been part of our problem, getting people to be able to get a ticket on the first floor and being able to go to the fifth floor with enough time and going to the right station and knowing what station they need to go to. that was a problem at first. in the meantime, we have more staff come up to the fifth floor, so we had to add in the fourth floor, which was records when we move records over, and we had to add more staff into the fifth floor, so that did take some time. >> there is also the ability for someone to come in and pull a

take it themselves. that is the one next to the elevators rather than standing in line or not standing in line, but cuing up for the front desk -- queueing up for the front desk. commissioner murphy: the frequent fliers, as they like to call themselves, that use the department are telling me that it is impossible to work the way you guys are trying to do it. people in middle management are telling me the same thing. you need to listen to middle management on each floor. >> we are trying to do that. commissioner murphy: i can understand one system for the fifth floor only. separate system than for the other floors. we could probably make that work in the next month. you guys could make it work, but you are not going to make this work successfully trying to

combine all these floors together. commissioner lee: any other questions or comments? thank you. >> is there any public comment on the update on permit tracking systems? >> mr. murphy brings up a good point. the imitation of the schematic system is telling on the future adoption of the computer system. if they cannot get the simple electronic system to work, and i have a piece of paper that said it was supposed to work by last november -- if they cannot get the simple electronic system to work, what kind of a permit tracking system are we going to have? probably worse than the one we have now. thank you. commissioner hechanova: thank you. next item. >> 9d, an update on other

activities affecting the administration of the department. >> actually the hiring in of the new clerical people that will be running the system. these people were supposed to be hired in january, as we all know, and the requisitions were not signed by the mayor's office until last week. we are putting them out there. we do need people to man the desks that will be issuing the tickets to people, so it is not just a matter of whether the computer system works or not. we also have to have staff to be able to man the system. it is not going to do any good if we have something that is not going to be manned by people or have people to actually help people use the system, and that is what we have also been waiting for, so that it will all culminate hopefully before the end of next month. commissioner hechanova: thank you. any other comments? >> is there any public comment on 9d?

commissioner hechanova: next item. >> item 10, review and approval of the minutes of the special meeting of december 5, 2010. have a motion. commissioner walker: move to approve. >> second. >> all those in favor? >> aye. >> opposed? minutes are approved. item 11, commissioner questions and matters. 11a, increased the staff. commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents, policies, practices, and procedures which are of interest to the commission. commissioner walker: as a result of some of the issues that have come up, i would really like to have bus revisit the process for registering vacant properties and see if there is a way that we can catch more of these

properties and maybe evaluate if it is working to reduce blight. i also would maybe like to get a presentation of around code enforcement and how the different departments do referrals. then, i think that we asked this before in response to mr. morales' issues about the licensing, if we could get the city attorney to respond as to our jurisdiction on his specific case, maybe in writing, and then also, i think that the issue of the director's ability and our ability around deputy directors and our responsibility under the charter -- that maybe something that we could get an update from

our city attorney. i think that we have -- the previous director actually made huge changes in or adjustments to what the charter mandates, and we approved that. i think we need to understand what our requirements and responsibilities are under the charter. commissioner murphy: you are saying you want that on the agenda? i would agree with that. >> is there any public comment on item -- commissioner lee: wait, there's still more. just piggybacking on the vacant buildings and blight laws, maybe we should include that to see what