where we were at the beginning of the year and also from where the capss program handed it off to the city administrator. and she has been very, very strong and supportive of lawrence and the group that has really been understaffed and trying to bring this about, and it is something that is very, very important. thank you very much. >> is there any public comment on item number three? seeing none, item number four -- president hechanova: there is somebody. >> this is for general public comment. we are on public comment. the bic will take public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda.

>> good morning, commissioners. thank you for the opportunity to speak. my name is sue zandt dumont, and it is wonderful. i want to talk about how wonderful it is that recreation and park is finally taking care of this historic landmark. recreation park is the boat house landlord, and they have neglected to of house for many years, blaming the tenants to the cat on a month-to-month lease for six years. since stage one of the capital improvement has begun a broad house, several health, safety, and environmental issues have surfaced. i contacted mayor lee, who is responsible for the general manager of recreation and park, but he is not reply. i contacted dbi and dpw. dbi is refusing to take complaints and dismissed my call before i could talk to them about the lead bank -- lead bank -- the lead paint contamination

and injuries on site. there are no files for any of the work being performed at the boathouse, which is strange. in 2011, there are 11 other golden gate projects in the dbi data base, along with a long history of permits for golden gate park. in the past few weeks, recreation and park, power washed, sanded, and great 68 years of lead paint job of the exterior of the boat house without using protection as required by local and state ordinances. most homeowners who have painted their house know that this is an absolute must. many different people witnesses were going on with no safeguards against the lead it ships and particles. the boathouse was built in 1946 and was not banned for sale until the 1970's. so layers of lead paint on the boat house have been disturbed and washed into lakes in nearby lawns and walkways. i have included, on the last

page of your package -- i do not know if the overhead can be put on. these are just some informal photograph the people live with their cell phone that was sent to me of paint chips in and around the beds at the lake. so you know there's a lot of other particulate matter ever else in the air. i can attest to the fact that the boathouse has never had any lead paint mediation or abatement. i did research on the history of the boathouse when i nominated for landmark status last year other health safety issues have been that the newly installed unpermitted paving has changed the height of a walk with an steps so several people and children can trip and injure themselves. one gentleman had to be taken to the emergency room last friday and was kept overnight because of serious cuts and bruises to his ribs after falling on the

steps. he is not the only person that has required medical care after falling in the past few weeks at the boathouse. the paving contractor free legal passerby's that he had no idea that there was a historic 100- year-old retaining wall and levy. [bells rings] i will try to go quickly. he was surprised to see the what we covered in water, seeping from the lake, after he hammered out the old pathway. not knowing what else to do, again, he said he had no oversight from anybody from dbi. he just put in more concrete. on october 6, i contacted dbi with my concerns and was referred to the senior inspector. he left a voicemail the next afternoon, and i have a transcript of it. patrick -- i have made inquiries of several people and this is

the san francisco recreation and parks, not dbi. this is ending with in the parks system. we have no jurisdiction over anything in golden gate park, the lake, are anything in -- anything like that. dpw would be involved. your primary point of contact would be san francisco rec and park. it is not a building inspection issue. the problem i have with his comments are that dbi has no jurisdiction. it is not true. doesn't the building permits have been issued for golden gate park -- dozens of builtding permits have been issued for golden gate park. he may have a poor memory. on it 12-24--- >> i am sorry. we have to stop. the commissioners will review your package. >> i have questions about what needs to happen. elderly and children have been injured, and the lead paint is a

serious environmental concern. i have one letter, but they're probably others coming to you from concerned citizens about all this work going on without permits. crazy. if you're not going to oversee the men and forced the coach, who will? thank you. president hechanova: thank you. >> good morning. my name is nancy. i wish to thank everyone who responded to my public comment a year prior commission meeting where i inform you about a missing complaint on the tracking system. the complaint has been restored on my end, and i wish to acknowledge this correction. thank you. today, i wish to bring to you a much more serious complaint, that i am requesting the agenda for a hearing by this commission in the near future. you will recall the tragic failure at a construction project on third street in

august, where four workers were seriously injured because of that incident, i reviewed the dbi procedures for special inspections, and written in administrative bulletin 046, issued january 1, 2011. as well as looking at a sample of dbi files and special inspection reports for projects currently under construction. from my initial analysis, i can say that some of the procedures and certification outlined in ab 046 are not being carried out as written in the san francisco building code regarding test samples are not been documented, nor is the requirement to have a structural observer submit a written statement to the building official regarding the frequency and extend up structural observations prior to the commencement of the observations, as required by section 1710 of the building code.

also i found that the progress reports on special inspections are not being filed or submit it. and the only reports that i have found were final speed up the lack of timeliness of special inspection reports that feeds some of the monitoring activities that dbi intended to be done through ab 046. i found the 550 jersey street project approved with a permit issued in 2001 that expired with no work done had special inspections, special certification, and special testing requirements to be done. however, the renewal permits issued in 2011 failed to require these inspections. therefore, the project is moving forward without any special inspections of were specified by the engineer on record in 2001. to be noted on the current building permit. therefore, there is not going to be any tracking system with this information, and none of these

special inspections are going to be done. [bell rings] these are complex topics. this is why i ask that you schedule a hearing on the specific topic of special inspections and ab 046 compliance within the building department, by all staff. thank you for considering these comments. also, i would like to support what the prior speaker had said in regard to the importance of having this body be responsible for enforcing the building code. it is only you that does it, not dpw. thank you. president hechanova: thank you. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is earl. i live at 4,803rd street. i have nothing for you to read. but i am happy to get you a copy of it. i am here to talk about 4801 third street. this has been a building that has been there about 30 years.

the reason i am here today is that it is falling over. the entire building is collapsing on to the bus stop. the area that it is located in as a heavily -- buses are heavily used there. it is a stop for 24 divisadero. it is the t-line stopped. a major hub for its transportation to the building has been around for quite some time. i know that there is a political storm connected with it. i am not involved in politics, nor do i choose to be, but i know that is part of the hold up with this building. if anyone that you would like to look at this building -- it turns out the gentleman behind me has pictures of the building. you will see that it literally is collapsing. as a citizen who has no idea how to take care of things like this, i started with the symbol 311 called which led to the next person and the next person. i have gone to the supervisors, the mayor, and the city attorney, who directed me to

deputy sweeney. i wrote you a letter and an e- mail regarding this building. i would like you to take a look at this building. it is a serious cause. it is going to fall. it is literally falling. any time during the day, you'll see lots of people standing in front of this building waiting for the boss. it is so back, it is just amazing that it is there. the backside of the building is torn out. it has been used by a lot of homeless. the backside is torn up and used for is-area. the side of the building is saturated with urine. i am sure the foundation is gone, too. just physically inspecting the building, you'll see it leaning. it is literally buckling. that is what i have for you today. i appreciate your time and your service. i look forward to hearing from you all soon. thank you. president hechanova: which direction is it leading? >> towards the bus shelter.

it is literally collapsing on to the bus shelter. you cannot miss it. just physically look at it, and you can see if collapsing. it is so bad. there is no fence around it. again, i stumbled into this. i realize there's a big political storm around it. it just needs to be fixed. it is going to fall. thank you. president hechanova: thank you.

>> good morning, commissioners. my name is robert davis. i live in at the bayview. there are hundreds of lighted buildings. there are three examples here. the first one is the mendell plaza, which my friend has talked about. it is right at the t-line and has been vacant. the building permits are both current and expired. 2006, and currently fees due to the city in excess of $6,000. another one is down the street on oakdale. in addition to all of the

complaints, it has piles in the backyard and is abandoned. the third one has been on the city radar for 15 years, and it is a bunch of shipping containers, some plywood construction buildings where people are actually living. you can see all of the cars, and you can see what these people are living. it is on a country road in the rural south -- this is not a country road in the rural south. this is a main street in san francisco. this one has many features and overlaps jurisdictions. it is difficult for citizens to report. but the dbi does enforce building codes, and i am sure they know which of the descriptions are under their jurisdiction. currently, the process for handling complaints to be litigated is approximately 14

steps. none of these steps include any kind of an intake system for the departments to share the burden of figuring out jurisdictions and to shift that to numerous agencies. when you call 311, they take you to different places. most of the time you get nowhere. there is no cross-training, i do not think, between different departments. sudley to clarify jurisdiction and to enhance cooperation. the last step in the dbi complaint process is this commission reviews all cases and decide on the next course of action, that is to refer the case to the city's attorney's office for the lien process. what i am wondering is how many cases in the bayview had been brought to the commission's attention? [bell rings] in may, i did speak to director sweeney, and he promised to do

something about all three of these. i am not sure what process is being taken now. in the worst case, the building gets sold and the key is good collected. the new owner fixes the building, gets permits, collects the money, everybody wins. [bell rings] the building is fixed. there permits and fees and everybody wins. if nothing happens, nobody wins. some of these properties have been on the radar 15 years. i am wondering two things. if i can get a sunshine law requesting for all open notices of violations in the bay view, which i think is fair. data base-driven, nothing fancy. and if i can make this an agenda item one day in the future. thank you. president hechanova: thank you.

>> are there any further public comments? seeing none, item number five, directors' report. 5a, update on dbi's finances. >> pamela, deputy director of administrative services dbi peter i am presenting the financial report for three months, which is still a little early to be able to say exactly where we're going to end the year. at this point in time, we're projecting to end the year on budget. i want to go over the revenues and expenses. in terms of the revenues, as you know, the largest part is

charging for service. we have 25% of the year already concluded as of the end end of september. right now, our revenues are 28.4% in terms of charges for service. so we're doing well in that area. as i mentioned before, the apartment and rental unit fees will come in starting in december. the deadline is december 10, before people start to have penalties. usually these get posted in december and january. so we will know better when we are actually in the budget process, when we submit the budget to you, exactly where we will be at that point in time. when you look year-over-year in terms of our revenues, it does show that we are -- we have 37.52% unless this fiscal year

than last fiscal year at this point in time. the majority of that is due to the intergovernmental agreement, because we got a lot of money early in the year last year for the transbay project and for the exploratorium project and for the uc project. we looked at the valuation that issue permits, and we show an increase of 54.3%. last time i reported a very large increase, and we continue to have an increase in the evaluation of issue permits. when you look at the projects we're processing, this year we are showing less in the small projects, those with valuations less than $2,000, but we're

showing a large increase of projects from $2,000 up to over $1 million with a significant amount of increasing in those $1 million and more. we do see growth and recovery. we have a lot of activity in our inspections and our current services. so that is the good news. in terms of the expenses, as you can tell, again, 25% of the year has passed. about 20% of the salaries and fringes have been expended. the of the percentages are very small in other areas of the budget, including non-personal services and services of other departments.

we are trying to make sure that we do not exceed the budget and that we have enough staff. that concludes. >> i have a couple questions. do we raise the fee on stakeholders for permits and lighted buildings? could you maybe give us something at the next meeting, the difference in revenue that that brings in? >> sure, we do give a very lengthy projection of each of the line items, but i will be glad to make this a little more user-friendly.

>> it says $28,500. then you go down four or five lines, it has a discrepancy. could somebody explain that to me? >> you are reading the budget column. >> maybe i am on the wrong line. >> no, you're on the right line. the budget for off-hours plumbing inspection is $26500. for off-hours electrical is $ 27500. the budget is established on the prior-year revenue. there's always -- in any system, and the accounting system, when

people pay, there could be some off-hour inspection money coming in under plumbing inspections. what we do is look at a little higher level, which is looking at what is really happening in plumbing, what is really happening in electrical. i will be glad to provide that analysis, which is we look at what the revenue is and what the expenses are in terms of the off-hours inspections. >> off-hours means over time? >> it is outside of our regular business hours. >> the difference here is significant. i mean, 12 times more. obviously one department there is doing very well.

i do not know if the word is the other department is not doing very well. maybe somebody could enlighten me. >> i would be happy to. what you're seeing there with plumbing, mostly all the off- hours inspections have to do with covering trenches. when you go to electrical, it is almost always the high-rises. it is always life safety tests. most buildings in san francisco do not allow life safety tests because it disturbs the occupants of the building. i am confident there probably three or four overtime inspections each evening and/or in the morning prior to the building being open that are electrical inspectors going out, because the volume of work is so much higher. >> good enough explanation. thank you. >> i have a question. on the boiler permit penalties, $15,000?

under inspection services, item 61, 156. >> week -- >> that is a program that is run through pid, plumbing. we have one dedicated inspector that travels the city checking boilers for their yearly certifications. if people do not certify within a certain time span, there is a notice of violation. the code specialize a certifying that they have to pay for not -- a certain find they have to pay for not complying to the code, to certify their boiler. >> are there time limits to how these penalties can really be resolved really to to the onset of the cold season coming about? because it always seems like the

spike in complaints happen after these penalties have been in place for well over a year. >> these penalties are more for just not having it certified. you're supposed to get it every year. we're on top of it. we have the data base. they're getting inspections. we are going out -- they are self certify. we do not go out. we're monitoring, and our inspector is going out when they do not certify it. he does do spot checks and complaints. >> one more quick one. dbi non sufficient funds. is that bounced checks? >> yes, it is. >> what kind of system do we have retrieving these? >> this is what we do, one of the down sides of the way the system works is that someone

comes in, they pay us, and we do not know for about five to seven days whether the check has bounced or not. we do not know immediately, and that is one of the reasons why we're getting a new cash management system, to try to be able to get that information faster. we then suspend the permits immediately. we send out a letter to them and to the owner of the properties that there is a bounced check. we give them something between 15 and 30 days to respond, and then we turn it over to the treasurer-tax collector of delinquent revenues. they then start the process that includes collections, and they can go as far as liens on the property. we do follow up on a regular basis. if there are people who have, you know, the frequent people who give us bad checks, we do --

we are very careful on what we actually issue. we also have sent out and closed down project for bad checks could as a we try to stay on it as much as possible. we saw a rash of them for a while last year when the economy was bad, and now it varies. >> that is a pretty small percentage anyway, but i am glad -- we cannot change to the system for the rest of the user's who all pay on time and honor their commitment. >> the other thing is is if you have given us a bad check, when you come in to make it right, you have to pay $50 more because there is a fee that we have to turn over to the bank, and you cannot give a check. you cannot give the same type of check.

you either put it on a credit card or you have a cashier's check. we do not allow someone to do it twice on the lead twice in a row for the same permit. >> ok, thank you. >> commissioners? >> one other question. line-item 611.21, permit extension filing. that seems to be a very low figure for what seems to be quite a few outstanding projects out there. are those being deferred? >essentially the budget for 2010-2011 is $1,000. >> we have been processing quite a few of the extensions, and i will look into that