thanks. commissioner campos: any other member of the public who would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, this is an information and possible action item. could we have a motion directing staff to pursue this item. commissioner avalos: i would like to make the motion that staff pursue some analysis of rank choice voting, here, locally in san francisco. what are the trends? what do we have in terms of services for public education? a measure of how successful that has been. if possible, looking at trends elsewhere around the country and -- i do not know if we want to look elsewhere globally, but i think the country is useful. also, something else to add, perhaps, if there is controversy around financing of rank choice voting in other places, we could elucidate what that might look

like as well. it might be different in other places. i think it is with developing a broader perspective of it as well. how does that sound? commissioner campos: great. commissioner pimentel: i would like to second the motion. commissioner campos: we have a second. i assume there is clarity in terms of what we are asking. if we could take that motion without objection. again, thank you, colleagues, for your support. i think it is good to move in that direction. >> item 7, goals and objectives for 2012. commissioner campos: this is an item to provide the commission an opportunity to talk about our objectives for this calendar year. one thing i would say is that we will have a new commissioner coming on board pretty shortly. i think by our next meeting. i do not know if this is an item where people want to engage in

the discussion now or if it would be better to wait until we have a full complement to the commission. one of the things that i want to say is in terms of the objectives of lafco from my perspective, the main, i think, objective, at least has to be right now to make sure that we have an effective and successful community choice aggregation program and that not only includes, you know, the contract that is before the board, but that is also on parallel tracks a robust buildup, and i think that has to be the priority of lafco. that said, i also think it is important for us as a commission to think of different ways in which we can be a part of a discussion or review of issues of importance to the city. the issue of voting and rank choice voting as an example, but

i think there are other areas where lafco can also weigh in. as a share, and would welcome any suggestions or proposals that members of the commission have in terms of things that were -- that we are not working on, that we are not looking at that maybe we should be working on and looking at. i think that is important for us to think outside the box of what we have been doing in the last few years. commissioner avalos, anything to add? commissioner avalos: i am thinking we could initiate the conversation now. perhaps we could open up again when we have a larger number of people. commissioner campos: commissioner pimentel, thoughts or comments at this point? no? why don't we open up to public comment? any member of the public that would like to speak on item 7. >> eric brooks again. this is the opportunity i will

take to talk about what i mentioned before, and that is public broadband. i am sure that some or all of you followed what happened recently in washington, d.c., are around the "online privacy act" which would have sent to the internet -- censored the internet. it looks like thankfully, that has been beaten back. if you look over the course of the last decade especially and even since 1996, we can see that corporations are making more of an effort every year, and no matter whether there is a democrat or republican in office, to get more and more exclusive control of the internet and keeping the public walled off so that it can charge high fees and decide what content we see on the internet. a few years ago, myself and some other organizers with a coalition called public net, one of whom is bruce wolfe, who i recently spoke to around this,

got through to lafco, made sure that hearings happened to stop what was going to be a monopolization of our local wireless service in san francisco, and part of that discussion was -- if we are not going to do this city wide wireless, what are we going to do? during that discussion, it came up that the obvious answer and much better answer is to do city-wide fiber optic broadband. at least start with a citywide luke that people can hook into with wireless and eventually build broadband out to every single home. if we do it right and use revenue bonds, it would not take a lot of tax money to do that. i e-mailed some of you, and i could e-mail it again, a study that was done early in the decade about the possibilities and how to rollout fiber optic broadband in san francisco. based on the conversation i had with mr. wolf and based on what

a lot of us have been observing with corporations really moving hard in this last year to get control of the internet from various corporate angles, i do not think -- i know i have been kind of quarterly bringing this up, but i think it is time for us to start really hitting this again. i do not think we can wait much longer. i would urge you to agendize this session so we could talk about the possibility of fiber optic broadband as a public system so we no longer have to deal with just getting our service from comcast and at&t, which, from personal experience, has been held for me. i am sure some of you have probably had problems with those sort of duopoly carriers as well. there will be a key component with how we build howcca and -- how we build out cca and smart

birds. i think it is time for lafco to take this on. -- smart grids. commissioner campos: any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. we will come back to this in a future meeting so that once we have a fuller discussion, we can take action in terms of adopting a set of goals and objectives. commissioner avalos: i had been looking at fiber and -- i think looking at fiber and broadband is worthwhile. i just do not know if we can bet that within our year, given our timeline and scope of work, but i think it is a worthy thing to look at. we can continue the conversation when we have a fuller contingent of people here. commissioner campos: i think that makes sense. commissioner pimentel. commissioner pimentel: [inaudible] in with maybe in october, closer to the end of the year? commissioner campos: ms. miller?

>> i think what we will do is keep it on the agenda for our next meeting so that our newest commissioner, we can talk a little bit about if there is any additional point of interest or subject matter. then we can talk about timing. we will have a better idea then, i think, about timing, for some of these issues, particularly the voting worked -- voting were--voting work. commissioner campos: as we come back to the idea of setting goals and agendas, the staff to think about the timing of when these agendas could be taken up. maybe you have some suggestions for us in terms of how to plan out, you know, the different things that come up, including the issue of fiber, which i think is actually a very good one. commissioner, anything else? if it is ok, can we have a motion to continue this item to the call of the chair?

i will make sure that we put it on the next agenda. we have a motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner pimentel. we will take that without objection. please call item 8. >> item 8, executive officer's report. >> there is no report. we can move on. commissioner campos: public comment on item 8? seeing none, public comment is closed. if you could call item 9. >> item 9, public comment. commissioner campos: public, not at -- not on the agenda but is otherwise within the jurisdiction of the local agenda agency commission? public comment is closed. item 10. >> item 10, future agenda items. commissioner campos: be on the items we have identified, any future agenda items you would like to bring up? is there any member of the public who would like to speak on this? seeing none, public comment is closed. last item. >> item 11, adjournment.

commissioner campos: meeting adjourned. i want to thank everyone for coming up to the meeting. we look forward to our follow-up meeting cca -- on cca and setting up a joint meeting with the public utilities commission. again, thank you to the members of the public, to puc staff, lafco staff, commissioners. thank you, madam clerk.

president hechanova: good morning. today is thursday, february 2, 2012. this is a special meeting of the building inspection committee. the first item on the agenda is roll call. commissioner clinch? >> here. commissioner lee? commissioner lee: here. we have a quorum. and i would also like to introduce jackie hoverubbard, an

assistant that will help with the commission. the next item is item number two, report discussion and possible action to approve the department of inspection commission budget for 2012-2013 and proposed draft budget for 2013-2014. >> good morning. pamela levin, department of building inspection. this is our second meeting on the budget for 2012-2 thir12013. we have responded to the issues you have brought up. i first want to tell you where we are in the budget process it's self and what the key dates are. we have to submit the budget to

the mayor's office on february 21. this is a charter-driven date, and there is no leeway. any changes we make on the budget really need to have been prior to the time we submit them to the mayor's office. the reason is it makes it easier for us to make those changes, because after it gets to the mayor's office, it is their budget, and we have to negotiate any changes. our budget is considered by the board of supervisors on june thfirst. between february and june, there is negotiations with the mayor's office. negotiations with the unions for the open contracts, which will affect our budget. there will be changes that would be made for work orders based on what the department has

submitted in the budget. we have not gotten most of our large work orders in the agreement on what the numbers are. we still have the estimates in their, which i feel confident that we have sufficient money to cover what changes might be made. probably in the meantime from the time the budget is submitted to the comptroller's office and mayor's office and the mayor proposing his budget, there is public meetings, neighborhood meetings, various budget meetings to get feedback with the community, and so that process occurs. of course once we get to the board of supervisors, we go to the budget analyst making recommendations, going to the board of supervisors in negotiating the budget, which

will all happen at the end of june. the budget will be approved by the board of supervisors in july in between -- the month of july we are on a steady budget, which is the budget we're on right now. that gives you an overview of the deadline. during the timeframe that we have been the last meeting in this meeting we met with central shops, under the city administrator's office. we met with the department of environment to make sure we fill the city's climate plan, which essentially says all department s will switch vehicles over the

next amount of years. the meeting was very successful. they did think it was a great idea that we replaced 10 vehicles per year. they gave us the list of approved vehicles, and at this point our plan is to go with prius's and rangers. >> [inaudible] >> chevy colorados. smart cards are not on the approved list of vehicles. in terms of long-term projects that we have been discussing in the budget arena, we will be implementing kinematiq-matics bn this time and march 5. we will be working on this

federal of training, public our reach, it should. we're going to go back and review what we had done iprior o the november timeframe and implement it. we have gotten a consensus of the various unions that were concerned about the system. the other issues are all listed in the memo, so i would be glad to answer any questions on the door in the that you have on the budget. >> what is the date it has to be submitted to the mayor? >> february 21. there are standard i its forms and information live to submit, so it does take a little while to do everything.

-- there are standardized forms and information to cement. -- submit. >> commissioners, questions? >> i am looking at the our reached schedules. if we are as the city to act on of mandatory seismic strengthening program, might we amend that? are there additional funds that might be available to do that is what i am hoping for? i know there are plans to have a mandatory program has some point this year. >> good morning, commissioners. director of d.b.i. the funds for the mandatory seismic retrofits will be through the city administrator's office, because the permits are

paying for the services of dbi, and since we are an enterprise fund, we cannot loan those monies out from the enterprise fund. the mayor's office is looking for other funding sources, maybe through the assessor's office or something to tax credit on the bill or something. >> bank you. is that specifically where our funding is to be spent within the department? -- thank you. >> yes, that is the first priority to spend it within the department. for your information since last month we have only gathered $80,000. we are actually supplementing our disaster coordination unit with d.bi.i. funds. construction is picking up, and we do not know what the next six

months will bring. so we're not getting it again. >> the quarter of a million for training, and that seems low. now that we have a new code. is that sufficient, 245,000? it seems very low to me. >> the travel and training budget is 324,000. basically what we did was we had everyone request all of the things they felt they needed. the issue on training really is being able to have a whether you have it on site or on site is

making sure you have available time to be able to have the people go to that. to the extent that this is low, i think everyone would like to be able to send more people to training, but the realities of being able to free people up from the current job to do that makes it such that we have to look carefully at what people want. i am sure the director has -- >> we have a proposal on my desk right now to train 40 people in the caps program for actually being the inspectors we need. that is coming out of this year's budget. this might seem low, but we still have money in this year's budget to do more training.

so what this is is split up between two years of training come and hopefully it will be sufficient to train everyone in what we want. it is not everything that everyone wanted, but it is close to being realistic. the>> the current year we had of plumbing trainer brought in. in terms of electrical, we got together with puc and did other departments involved, and they brought someone in to do training, and we took some of those training slots. what we're trying to do is look at bringing people here and making sure it is targeted to what exactly we need to know. you are right, it is -- there is an incremental difference. it is usually a more cost- effective to have them come in house.

>> the a good thing is we're talking about bringing q-matics back on. are the employees trained sufficiently to bring that back on? >> that is what we wanted to take a month to go back and retrain people. go back and retrain them and make sure that when we come around to march 5 that they are ready to go. so we do know that having a delay does put the skills behind the back of your head rather than in front. what we're trying to do is make sure they are ready. >> it sounds like the funds are there to implement the program, but are they there for the training? >> yes. the training comes from within. the people that have worked with the vendor for a couple of years

have developed a training program and do it ourselves. if there is any questions, of course we can bring in the vendor -- have they dopresident hechanova have they done anything regarding the stakeholders that come in and speak a different language like chinese, spanish? i see a lot of possible confusion. and have the address that at all? -- have they addressed that at all? >> we have people that speak burial -- various types of language that it bilingual pay. we have people available for

bvarious languages. as much as possible. we will look at, and make sure there is siphonage and stuff and other languages. w-- signage and stuff in other languages. president hechanova: good luck with that. that was originally designed to work on one floor. now we're talking about four or five floores. >> we're only doing it on the fifth floor and sixth floor. president hechanova: another question regarding -- i would like the public to understand.

the city grants program is that 1.7 million. can you give us insight on where that goes? >> sure. i have a slide that i wanted to show that gave the distribution of the funding. give you a background on how we got to where we are. we could put out an r.s.p. at the end of the fiscal year, and because all of the contracts were up on did your first. in that we equalize of the services between entities, so that means the unit of service

and what would be done would be equalized so people came back and requested more money to do this service. president hechanova: what i am really getting at is who are these people and services? >> if you could put that up. i know it is hard to see. for the code enforcement are reach programs, we have just cause. chinatown cdc, tenderloin. san francisco department association and housing rights. that comes to form grid $16,000. and--- that comes to $416,000. dolares street is mission

neighborhood center. in they do the same thing as all the other collaborative, which is work in the s.r.o's that are there to try to work with the issues that affect us. so it is housing issues. >> they also, if i may, they have major our reach to the swedish-speaking communities where i think most of our our reach is really trying to take organizations that are ready to are reached in these communities that are not english-speaking. >> i understand that, but i was asking so the public would know where the money is going. she is doing a good job of explaining coverage as give her time purit,