being so dogged but it makes me wonder if it isn't a particular landlord but a geographic area? if we have any kind of strategy to pursue it in terms of the geographic concentration of properties in that respect, and has a profound impact on the community and the folks who live there to have a great concentration of properties that are blighted or abandoned or have caught fire or whatever. our system allows us to track geographically in that way. the answer is yes and there are more blighted buildings in the southeast portion along with the mission district and that is strictly economic gentrification. it is not our policy but it's a reality and we're part of it when contractors and developers

go in to hunter's point, they do buy these blighted properties that have been sitting there for years. it is not a system because, but we see where the permits are going. most of the blight is in the southeast portion of san francisco and the people who own these houses are usually elderly and on fixed incomes. it starts with a roof leak and a new roof cost $10,000 but they don't have it. pretty soon you have mold and mildew and dry rot and they abandoned house and go stay with their children or wherever they can get into. in oakdale, what the lady was in a rest home and it was for sale for three years, but it took a long time to get her to agree to sell the building. by the time she went to sell the

building, it was in bad shape and we are in the middle of a recession and there were no takers. i think it was the cheapest house in san francisco and they could not get a price for it. >> this is a follow-up on the crossover -- i understand where sometimes the people to make complaints might be confused about where they should go and there is crossover based on the coach and staff of my understanding was previously we used to have supervisors overseeing inspectors from both sides so it would not be so silent. one of the problems right now is not that we find that, it's the same property and the supervision right now is so silent, sometimes housing

doesn't know there has been a building code violations and the building inspector goes in and as another with housing violation. i was wondering why that might be better served -- for the if there was one manager that could oversee both sides of the house and say this is a property that has had multiple inspectors in and out and we're going to spend time looking at this place and resolving it -- >> i have a question that is similar. we thought about having a code enforcement deal with the complaints and have that flow through their -- >> if it is a housing issue, the

housing division deals with that. they do the landlord, the tenant and the blight. >> they still would but it would funnel through code enforcement. >> code enforcement was moved to the sixth floor. there is much more emphasis on code enforcement now. we are hiring people and starting to get up to full strength and there are positive signs of that. we are moving forward and talking to each other. it's all like we don't talk, does not hurt the situation -- what happens when either or inspector goes out there? if you see blight or a vacant building, someone has to happen.

we have a lot more vacant buildings and a blight than we ever have can't more going there. >> what's -- when does code enforcement get involved? >> it the different process. housing keeps it in that district. if i'm house inspector and i see the lights or have a code violation in a multi-unit building, isolate them on it and give them a reasonable amount of time to fix it. if not, that inspector takes it to eight code enforcement hearing. it is simply did you or did you not get a permit to do that work or is it a vacant building? those inspectors issue a notice

of violation. they have a lot more knowledge and it's only when the homeowner or contractor doesn't show any signs of working with the department that a second notice of violation is issued. housing does not really write that second notice of violation. the second notice of violation is the hearing. then it goes to code enforcement and then code enforcement sends it to a director's hearing. they are probably doing three- time is the amount of hearings as they were six months ago. if they're doing 30 or 40 per week, that's quite a bit. these are cases now where the clock is ticking and it's costing a lot more money. that is demonstrated by the 12th

avenue property we have. they have a $2,400 bill someone will have to pay and they will have to pay a before we sign off on the job. if a fix it and walk away, they have an order of abatement and will be on the lean cycle. then we take it to the board of supervisors, there is a lien against the property and it is a black mark against them and the bank is not going to like them and the bank is going to charge them. >> maybe i was not clear. my question was basic in terms of is there a human way we could stop selling among our own staff? i don't know how it worked before. but before we have one supervisor or manager overseeing the long term novs

that were not be resolved. regardless of which side they're wrong, they reported to that manager and to take care of that property. i think we have had is housing inspectors are doing something the building site does not know about and when building takes over, building inspectors don't necessarily look back to see what housing did. >> the opposite actually occurs. even if you look and say what permits are out there, you see a check mark and that indicates there is an existing case and he flipped over and they show the housing was there two months ago, what happened? the system we have now, you can

get the actual notice of violation and read with housing inspectors of. a lot of times it will be a landlord-tenant dispute and we're there for the backstairs being repaired or dry rot going on or they decided to upgrade the tenant called on that. enant called on that may or may not have had anything to do with that housing division but i see housing inspectors on a daily basis and the same thing applies to building inspections and there is discussion between the two. can we improve that? we probably should and we're working toward that. >> i do see some value of having a central person or group handling these and i

think sending them to one group might be beneficial to make it more efficient. perhaps they can decide which division can handle it so -- we don't know if one division is going around and they can't stop it and maybe this will prevent all of that and streamline everything a little bit. >> some of that would be ok, but will -- what housing does is quite a change. as a building inspector, i do not deal with tenants. >> i meant somebody taking the complaint and deciding where it goes. >> that would be the deputy director.

there are different cultures between the floors because what they are looking at is so different. >> why wouldn't it just be a code inspection who gets complaints? >> we can certainly look into that. >> i believe you are referring to is if we go back to 1990, there is a division called property conservation division that had that situation where everything went to code enforcement. the problem was when you started to hand things over to a different vision, you get to a certain part of the process and handed over and there's no consistency. the inspector is not invested and we were sued because we were taking too much time and the cases went through very long process and we didn't get a

result. the new commission and to department decided the housing division would take the case from beginning to end and that has been very successful. if we shipped these two rather section dealing with primarily other divisions writing to notices of violations instead of one, which i believe that with the process. if that is issue correctly, you do not need a second notice of violations. it works for those divisions, but what i am hearing is that commission is spinning around on the basis of some statements that really dealt with vacant building legislation. the way the work has been divided up is that even though there are provisions as far as the light issues, they want us to deal with it because we had the expertise dealing with the

landlord-tenant issues. we can deal with hording and clattering and capacity issues and reach out to property owners and family members and we have even filled out a loan applications to help these people try to get loans to make repairs. those types of things come to us and our inspectors use the complaint system more often. they do not have a clerical person to do data entry. they see a duplication and if they see someone has been out there, they deal with it. i don't know if you should fix something that isn't necessarily broken. the concern that gentleman raised was delighted properties and he's not seeing progress. that's a different issue that deals with whether we are

leveraging the vacant building legislation. maybe you want to put it under the housing division. if you are concerned about the provisions dealing with that, there's a possibility to deal with it. that is something that might work for might not. we to work with individuals dealing with a vacant building legislation. all i'm saying is by having housing take these properties from beginning to end, we get quality control, expedite them and have expertise with the inspectors. we have people who know how to deal with the clever ted and its different than a building inspector trying to deal with probe -- different disciplines,

a different set of skills. we will do whatever you want to do, but it is incumbent on us to give you that information. >> i don't think that was the intention, that the inspectors would still be doing the inspectors, but someone else would be keeping track of it. the issue is we have had tens of thousands, thousands of outstanding violations for quite a long time in building and housing and having somebody track it and be responsible for it -- it would be a clearing house said that the complaints go in one place and get directed and logged as code enforcement. >> the progress is tracked. >> good news about that is we are doing it and testing it

right now. one of the difficulties for me is getting the report out of the current system. when i meet with my seniors to find out where we are, we're getting a different number every time. i need to will be easier to get the management and reports and we can hand it over to a deputy director or whoever does that kind of oversight. i just wanted to make sure we could play into that. there's definitely a concern about making sure the housing cases are expedited. >> i don't think that's a question. >> when you mention code enforcement, we get very defensive. an important thing to keep in mind here is we're not dealing with one court, we're dealing with four separate types of inspectors and the way the system is set up is absolutely brilliant.

the housing inspectors take the case from the initial inspection of right through the directors and it works very well and there is no reason to change it. with regard to building and electrical and plumbing, those violations come out of the separate divisions. cited by three different types of inspectors. that goes to code enforcement on the sixth floor. that system is working rates because there's an awareness of this going back years. if you get an electrical violation, it gets a bit. if you look in that computer, if everybody does a review, they go into the system and on any address, there is a list right

there you will see all of them. you can tell where that. if it does not say it in regard to building, electrical and plumbing, you know it's on the wrong floor. if you are a property owner and you see where it was last week, you will know you better get cracking because it will be scheduled for hearing. if you have a complaint and you are a property owner, you don't see it changing -- if we change that, it doesn't make any difference. a lot of cases get abated or resolved building electrical and plumbing because they don't want to see that designation.

i would implore you to keep that in mind. >> thank you. >> i think this is a very healthy conversation. the department came out of a couple of years of tough times have a lot of what we're looking here is we are slowly chipping through that and i think we will be at a grievous and that violation here and i think we're getting closer and closer to that. i think the director did a good job getting the low hanging fruit off the table. i am a little more patient to let this system keep going. i do feel the frustration and having the press hearing and the dollar amount that was settled for, i know there was more

money there but there's a strong message being sent out and i think there's an element that there hasn't been too many people who have been beaten over the head here to do the right thing and if we get a couple more, the property owners start -- due to time, i think we will get better than we are right now. i would like to keep the conversation going but at the end of the day, we need to give what we have now and the concentration that has been done and more of an opportunity. i would like to keep touching base and give us updates on the success stories so we can see progress is being made. with regard to the blight, -- i

know what the difficulties are and i think it's chipping away at a big storm and i think we see some daylight at the end of the day if we just stay the course. thank you for that report. >> item #8, a discussion of attrition values for the b i compared to other departments. >> i am the deputy director of administrative services. i was working on this presentation with the mayor's budget office and the analyst had to go into a session with the board of supervisors. i am asking if this can be postponed until the following meeting. he said he would be available that week. >> thank you. if there is no objection, we will continue until the next meeting. >> item #9, directors report --

the update on finances and new hires. >> this will be short and sweet. on that calendar, the fiscal year has ended, but there are still charges that will occur throughout the next two months. right now, we are projecting a $13.7 million balance at the end of the fiscal year before in any adjustments are made for deferred credits. that consists of $10.8 million

in revenue. if you look at the graph on your screen, you can see 126% of the budget was received for charges for service and that as the area we are over this year. in the statistics in the report, we sigh 55.5% increase in valuation year over year so a lot of this revenue is due to large projects. we see quite a few large cranes across the city and in actuality, we anticipate that will slow down next year, but that is what happens in a 11-12.

in terms of the expenses, we are projecting an expenditure savings of $2.9 million. the majority of that is due to personal savings. we have been coming for every month talking to you about our ability to hire positions and that this last fiscal year, we were constrained in that. other areas we're seeing our materials, supplies and on personal services. some of this will change as the rest of the year gets charged. they usually close of the entries down in september so we will have a better idea of where we will end up. in terms of hires, and the last

month, we hired 16 positions, five engineers, eight clerks, one cashier and various other positions. we have to other engineers coming in august. tomorrow, we have interviews 48 clerk positions and its hopefully the beginning of august, the test is supposed to be done and we will get their referrals sometime in august. we will be hiring another 13 positions, and tree level quirks. we are moving along quite well in working with the individual assigned to us in terms of putting together the tests specifically for our department.

i think we will be on track for september and october november hiring. that is for the whole set of building inspectors. after that, the last ones they will be working on are the housing inspectors. we are still trying to hire 53 positions before january 1. we will come back and let you know as we go along. next month, we will come to you with a presentation on the budget and where we end up with the fiscal years 12-13. currently the budget is that the board of supervisors. the only major change they made was whether or not they would

have a third day or not and if they did not want it, whether the money would go to the various districts. we will see the final budget in early august and be able to come back with us a presentation where it was when we left you and when we get to the whole process. >> thank you. >> item 9 -- update on proposed legislation. >> i have some information on the updated ordnance -- i think

you heard about regarding the square foot area, that is still ongoing. another one is -- rose mary -- this is regarding chapter 41 because there is some language there we need to revise that. we have ordinance also regarding the bottles filling stations some language we want

to revise and i asked the technical service trying to resolve those lange which because they tie into major pumping operation and it's hard to keep track of that, but we want to be tied to the building authorization but still may be the remodeled effecting the drinking fountain. it any other questions? >> back to the one you just mentioned, is that going to come to the bic