south, or is it just a title ring of what services occur associated with that? >> the mission corridor is essentially from where it meets -- you know the talk of stand across from good will -- the taco stand across from good will and down to 13th, and it is pie- shaped. it includes three large departments -- human services agency is the large department, and then planning. we're calling it the mission corridor. vs. city hall. it is a nice name for our area. >> the consolidation or services we would perform, is there a cost associated with the departments that are essentially

saving what they would have performed that we end up being a host to those functions, and can we on our recovery cost be able to charge for that, or is it part of this, i guess, objective goal to reduce operational costs? >> we've made it clear that dbi is not the cash cow for this project. they are very rigid voluntarily working with us in terms of purchase of the equipment, power, what needs to be done in terms of capital improvement. we're working on trying to figure out how to charge rent and electricity, whether it is metered or some way. we're going to share in the cost, the benefit for them is

they will not be located somewhere else where they did not want to go. there is efficiencies that can be in terms of just bought efficiency, which is i am not going where i do not want to go, verses we will have inefficiencies and operation and cost sharing. >> will that be defined by an mou? >> yes. right now we're trying to figure out the costs so we can share them. we have experience with human services agencies in terms of sharing things. wheat contract with them for the help desk. we have a history of really cooperative working with them and i am sure there will come through. i do not want to do little ones, i want to do a larger one of the

actual construction. >> thank you. >> the other one i wanted to talk about is the cash management system, because this will also have a large impact on the project. it is looked at favorably because we are partnering with the tax collector on this project. it will actually replace the p.o.s. system that is extremely antiquated. we now have the first requirement document, and we hope to sign off by january that we're still looking at project launched by the end of april. we have an integration point that we built into the scope of work with the permit tracking system, so these things can work together. >> thank you. commissioners, any questions? >> item 7g, update on new hires.

>> we have not hired any new positions since we last talked to you, however, we do have several requisitions out. we are interviewing for three electrical inspectors on of the 14th, sometime this week. we have a couple of other positions that are stuck in the human-resources department for additional information, and as i mentioned, the clerks are just plain that stock, and we're talking to everyone we can about getting those moved. >> how long will they stay

stuck? a month? two months? >where are they being held at risk and diminished services? >> i have talked personally to our analyst in the mayor's office about four times on this. i have talked all the way to the deputy director of human resources department on its commo and,, and we are told thel try to do research and figure out -- there is a committee that consists of the mayor's office, a human-resources, and i believe the comptroller's office, and a review of requisitions. for some reason it has been sitting there for almost a month, and we are doing our best

to try to get it through. i expected to be released this month. >> thank you. >> any public comment on the directors' report items 7a-7g? seeing none, item 8, commissioners questions in matters, increase to stop. at this time commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding practices and procedures that are of interest to the commission.

>> commissioners? >> i know a couple the months ago we met with staff to review the program. subsequently there was a hearing at the board of supervisors specifically dealing with seniors and s.r.o.'s. it would seem we may have issues to resolve as to the out reach to the seniors community. i talked a little bit with the president about this that maybe we could meet with clabber this -- collaboratives and see where our department and our reach organizations could communicate better to help with code enforcement. maybe just an ongoing thing we could look at, especially how it affects seniors. >> i know the category here is we're providing the funding, but they are the ones doing the work. they are the ones responsible for the execution of that, and we continue to see that there is

some shortfall on the level performance. >> there is some sort of disconnected i think could be helpful to discuss. >> are those mou's pending or on going? >> i think they are up this coming year. >> we did you an r.f.p. and received proposals -- most or all of our current vendors are currently negotiating price with them. we did it proposals that were slightly higher than we are budgeted for. we will the fiscal year 2012-2013 and discussing that with the mayor's office. hopefully -- we're doing grants this year. we should have the grant agreements finish before christmas so the current

contracts do expire at the end of the year. we're hoping to have everything done before christmas. >> maybe it is time to look and see if we are recovering. i have concerns about the senior community, which is only going to get larger are over the next few years, and making sure that we are addressing the needs that might be unique to that population as we talk about multiple family buildings. >> the real challenge here is the fiscal responsibility where the department is being asked to ratchet down 5 percent signed, and then there are those that ask for more than what they had been advocated from last year. that is a very difficult task in the category of what they want more than what has been allocated. >> that is something that will

have to be discussed as part of next year's budget. >> yes. thank you. >> i am still not comfortable -- i know we went around and around to date about that. i still think there has to be a way to break this down where properties that have not been turned over -- let's use a number of 20 years that have been sold, changed hands. at that time there would have been a 3r report issued. let's say the same property in the past 20 years has gone through renovation and had permits for that job.

deputy sweeney could probably answer that better. doesn't that get put into the database? that should be very easy to retrieve an updated and issued a report. why should that take a week and a half, 10 days, the same as the one when you are going back to the 1920's or 1800's? i can understand why that one would take two weeks. but a new building, that information should be right there. is there a way we can break this down so that we do not get stock 100%? we're stuck, what say we get stuck 50 percent signed, but the other 50 percent signed it -- is there a way to release that? i would love to have someone take a look at that, and i believe there is a way. >> any other commissioner

comments? >> any other public comment on item 8a? >> nancy again. i would like to ask the commission to request a follow- up to the information you heard today on can't swing it permits, because once a permit has been cancelled, sometimes people want to actually then read new expired permits, and i think that is a separate issue, and it would benefit everyone if we had an update from the department to identify what is the process whereby an expired permit is then able to be renewed? what are the apostasies, time lines, cost? i think it is the kind of procedural issue that interjects with planning. we have heard they have a three- year entitlement, which then expires, so you have an

obligation but -- because you own and control the flow of information of any permits over to them. you are their agent. i would recommend we have a complete update so everyone is on the same page on how this works and what is required. thank you for your consideration of those requests. >> thank you. >> any additional public comment? item 8b, future meetings or agendas. at this time the council make this as a future meeting were determined items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of the building inspection commission. the next meeting is on january 18, and in january, as gail mentioned, is when we hear the budgets. there may be a possibility of having a special meeting if

needed. that date will possibly be on june 3 31st. >> when is the next pact meeting? >> thursday. at 2:00. >> any commissioner comments on item b? any public comment on 8b? seeing none, review and approval of the regular meeting. >> tis everyone in agreement that this meeting is finished? >> i want to thank you for trying to catch us up on this. thank you. any public comment on item 9?

>> i would like to wish everyone a happy christmas. happy new year. >> happy holidays. 9 > >> all the staff. >> item 10, adjournment. >> move to adjourn. >> second. >> all in favor? >> aye. >> we're now adjourned.