that we are traying to find best practices, so we want to learn from you. you know, we want to say it nicely even though we are addressing it to texas and we want and that way may be dealt, or be less hesitant to answer, if they got a cold call for example, from the non-profit. >> what did you thought about that. >> the places that the non-profits did not get any information, our staff went back and made four attempts for each of those cities but we would be happy to send a more formal request to letterhead that is a great idea. >> okay. >> and just and i don't know who to direct this question and so the obvious thing, and the biggest problem that we are having as a commission is trying to get through all of these novs and so on. and so if you look at these departments don't have this issue. >> and yeah. >> so they don't issue them. >> right? and so i was hoping to see how are they getting through all of the novs and i am looking at la

as the only one and do they maybe, how is their novs and i know that you talked 160 some in san jose. and which, you know, let's just talk a little bit because i think that we are getting a bad wrap there and we are trying to work through them and i want to highlight the fact that the other cities don't deal with them. the city of los angeles commissioner i have had the numerous calls in the last two years. and as jamie indicated that they had taken away the ability to gain the funding to our costs recovery and were now looking back at revisiting that issue to be able to support that program and it was something that they weren't doing and the other thing that they were looking at was completely reorganizing the model that they had created kind of from housing what they did is they took, the housing division, pulled it out and created a department that had the components of the mayor's office of housing, and brought all of the code enforcement

under one umbrella and they were having a problem, with the property values in la not being able to fund that department. and so there was a lot of policy issues going back and forth to what they were going to do with that. >> we have been closely watching what they do, because, their manager and it happened to be the sister of one of our previous inspecters and so we were watching carefully and getting information from them to see if we could improve, there was something that they were doing and but it was clear that we were and a little or a lot more in advance of them which was with regard to the cost recovery and as far as the turn aurnd and the notices of violations they did not have anything that we could claim. and the problem that all of the jurisdictions in california are having is that some of the code enforcement rules that have been traditionally been effective. and because the state is no longer audit and that used to

get a property owner's attention and some of those tools that we have had in the past are diluted and so, we go back to the hourly bill and that persuading of the property owner and letting it go out there month after month after month and the next thing that we can look at is whether or not we want to proceed with his administrative penalties such as going to be different from the civil penalties that will require the referrals to the city attorneys and we can use some of the models that we have and if you do not comply with the x number of days, you are not going to get bills for the cost recovery, and going to get a fine. and so, that is something that the jurisdiction could look at as possibly the next steps and but to summarize this and this was a non-and it was a preliminary study and a good one i think, from the standpoint that shows two or three major things and one is that without the jurisdiction

having adequate access on-line, that is no service and then the other, the other aspect is with respect to that, do i want to commend the director, and hema, for what they are trying to do, and with the is to make sure that a lot of this information, a lot more information will be on-line so that the people can readily get the information, that they need as far as assistance in a variety of areas, and the areas that are not traditionally have a direct connectness with the housing inspection services that the other things that commissioner melgar were talking about. so, from that standpoint, it is helpful to us to see what we can do in the future, and what we can do better, so right now, assisting for the housing inspection is that we are very happy to announce that all seven new housing inspecters because we were hearing, you know a large amount of vacancy and they are in place and going to training next week and by

the beginning of october they will be soloing in the districts around the 7th and so that is going to help us quite a bit form a lot more inspections and get into a lot more of these buildings, we also have been staffed up with the clerical as well. over the period of time that we did not have it was hurting us even more. that is the same that you will hear from the inspection divisions as well. >> as i remember, one of the things that la had implemented, that was, different, and interesting, was proactive schedule inspections, and buildings of a certain newness and above, and i never saw any statistics, as to what the out comes were, but there was like anecdotal stuff that land lords ahead of the schedule inspection would actually do to fix this which, you know, sort of, allow the department not to

have to issue the notices of violation, and not everybody did that, but most did, because they don't want to give up. so i am wondering if you looked at this official and now that they are all staffed up. and you might consider doing, schedules. >> you know that is an excellent point commissioner. and we had and they actually used one of our model for that which is the routine inspection. >> and so what we did with that is we looked at the improvements that they made and what the tools that we had at the time, we prior to that the inspection occurring instead of sending a letter out and these were for the inspections that we must do of the apartment buildings and hotels within a five year period and so we will do a prescheduling of that and the inspecters did not have the time to do the schedule and it was a manual halfway computerized system that will help to fully auto mate more with it in the field and

working with them on that. so the one thing that we did instead of just sending them a letter we sent them a package of information on what they needed to look at in their building, year wide. and so, with a 13, item checklist. and they could be looking at what we are going to see, so they could take care of these things before we walk in the building and we would give them at least two-week period before we will come out and set the date and the time where they could reschedule within a reasonable amount of time and so we were kind doing that give them that kind of a warning so that they could go ahead and you know, instead of a few days before, they could look at their building and assess and make the changes that they could make, in addition to that, and this now goes back to the commission about seven years ago, we added a provision, that every five years, in addition and the different cycle and the routine inspections they were to have industry professionals,

architects and general contractors and pest control contractors and look at the ex-per or building, the building. deck, and rear stairs. and anything like that. and make sure that those were properly secured and then submit an affidavit to us and they have been submitting those affidavits but the problem is tracking, and 6,000 records when you have one clerical post-and there is a problem. now that we have staffed up, we are looking at that. >> both of those things and kind of look at the la model and figure out what we can do to give the property owner advanced information, so that they can maintain the property so that when we come through to do the routine inspection, and it is as smooth as possible and maintain that property throughout the lifetime and so that we can focus the effort on those tenant complaints and those buildings where things have not been done, or if it is not a problematic common area of the building but it is something internal to the unit itself. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you.

>> just, really good, thank you so much for that. that was really informative. >> any public comment on item five? >> we are moving to item 7, director's report. >> a. update on dbi's finances. >> good morning, i am gale rubble and i am the acting chief financial officer, i want to talk about the budget before we talk about where we are with revenue and expenses. >> the mix has changed with the new budget year and so if you look at the charges for serves and you can see it for a smaller percentage of the budget this year than it was last year, and the reason for that, is because of other instances really fund balance and so we recognized a lot of fund balance in this year's

budget so that we could do the capitol project sos that we have a little bit of money in a capitol reserve and we put in the money and the elevators and the tenant improvements and it is really the capitol projects and you can see that we actually have 22 million dollars in other revenue. which is mostly fund balance. and then the apartment, rental, income is almost the same as last year, it is slightly less, the actual last two years have been lower than of the budget and we did go ahead and lower it this year. and if you look at the actual, what we have collected to date, apartment rental, income comes in twice a year. we won't get it until another few months, and so we are not seeing any revenue in that category. >> our charges for services, we received 20 percent whaf we budgeted we are 17 percent of the year, so we are a little faster, better than we are budgeted. if you look at the actual report, you will see that the revenue is down compared to last year, last year we had a

lot of really big projects come in during the summer time and so we are seeing more projects again this year and we are better than we are budgeted but we are less than last year. and we increased the budget for charges for services this year, about 5 million dollars, about 11 or 12 percent. and our actus for last year were much higher and so what we did do an increase and charges for services and we did not incease as much as last year, we thought that last year was abnormal with all of the large projects. what we expect to grow from last year's budget and we will subtract from what we saw last year. you will see a dichotomy, and we are less than last year and we are doing really well, compared ho how we budgeted. if you look at expenses you will see something similar with the budget, and you see the transfer to the projects and about 21 million dollars. the service for the other departments is our work orders and it is about the same as

what we did last year. and we have a few that are different and a slightly more in the department environment and less than mta, but the arrogate amount is less. >> we have a few one time things in there for the department and trying to get the chairs and jackets and the ongoing stuff is very similar to what we have budgeted in the past. and employee salaries, as you know we added a few positions this year and so it is higher than last year. if you look at our actuals so far this year, we are about 17 percent of the year. and we are very early in the year, so a lot of the things that we have budgeted for, like chairs, will not come for a few months. and some of of the trainings were starting to schedule but they have not happened yet. and personal employee salaries is slightly less than budgeted. but we are higher than last year, we have hired more people than we had at this point last

year. but we do have vacantcies and are continuing to hire this year. so basically for the finance support i am happy to answer any questions. >> commissioners? >> no? >> thank you so much. >> thank you. >> item 7 b, update on proposed legislation. >> good morning commissioners. tom, the acting director. since bill is not in, and i want to present the dbi and legislation, and you know, tracking and first of all our first item regarding the soft story building, and they are here from robert, on the item four. and of, and of the agenda. and also, i want to highlight that we have, we have to hand out the brochure for three different language, accomplish, spanish and chinese. and then, more welcome any commissioner want to get a copy.

the second, item is regarding the ordinance, 130765. that was a discussion with the puc, regarding, you know, assuring the, you know, the water, you know, to insure, the property that we have changed the language. thank you for our chief plumbing inspector, and also pinnacle service to add the language in there. and our items regarding the you know the second, is right now is working with supervisor chiu's office. and lots of discussion. they have a task force to discuss any, you know, anything that we can help in that, you know, drafting the legislation, because there are lots of like the safety issue that we need

to resolve first. >> and then on, and or, on the horizon, it is regarding the what we call the equipment emission, and you know, it will introduce by the health department and we have a big concern on that and we are still working on it to, communicate with them. and now to organize, 120669, regarding the condo conversion. we have quite a bit of people coming in to request for inspection. we have a task force, thank you for the building inspection division from five inspection per, you know, we increase to 16 inspections a week. and with the help from the electrical plumbing and

building. and then with the... the rec club management to help to make that work. and it is an update and a clean up ordinance, at one. and we have the health department coming into our department to answer questions at the fifth, and one, stop service counter, you know? they have, you know, helpful to answer any questions from the public. also, the bottom installation, you know, still working on your point now. and other state legislation and maybe you can read it and any question that you want to ask me? no? >> okay. i just wanted to go back to this. newly proposed ordinance to

control construction equipment emission. and a requirement that the construction and didn't have a minimumization plan, what is the perceived impact on both of the builders and the owners to add this layer to the process. >> okay. this is a very difficult task for the dbi. because, first of all, you are doing construction. and the equipment is already there. and then, the only thing that they look at the pack only, and the equipment. i cannot... but i cannot measure how much, you know, pollution in the air that is why we are still working on that with the health department. and maybe, then, you will want to answer and i don't think that we can, you know, enforcement, point, and it is hard to control. on the emission part. >> my understanding is that it

is projects over certain sizes it is not necessarily smaller projects. >> >> good morning, commissioners. on this proposed legislation, it is going to be hard, and we will have to work with the health department and we will have to work with dbi to figure out how to enforce it, on the large projects it is hard and you have it coming out every day as far as the poe lut ants, and the noise, and it is hard to regulate, what goes on with those. and so, it is going to be another layer that the contractor will have to give us a list of what the items are and the protocol and i am not familiar with it right now and how we are going to do it, we are at the beginning stages of it now. >> there is nothing. >> it is more conceptual now than the reality and so we have looked at it and how we are going toin force it. >> i don't understand from what we are talking about, is it just emissions from the

equipment? >> it is emissions from equipment and the notice level of the equipment. >> i see. >> not necessarily the dust controls or any pollution resulting from the actual activity. >> that the control on a separate ordinance. this is more for noise and the pollution that the equipment is produce. >> it is hard to regulate even if they listed the equipment, to use the of the equipment, well really alter, if they are using the same equipment and using the heavy excavation and it is going to create more noise and pollution. >> and osha has regulations. >> but emissions themselves,

for vehicles, are they already regulated by the state epa? >> i am not familiar with the state regulations, but they are regulated, you know in as far as the amount of emissions that they could have. >> and osha comes by once in a while and they have a agency for that. >> but, as far as the noise it is hard to monitor the noise for the use of it. >> right. >> i think that this ordinance is come from in the small and condensed areas like the high urban areas that we are in, and i am not sure where they are going with this, just like everybody else is scratching their head and how you are going to enforce this and where dbi is going to fall in this. >> and i don't want to out reach, the noise complaints because we have a lot during the construction and we are proactive in asking the contractors to do the good out reach and they do the out reach and they have contact numbers and to give letters, and in

some of the larger contractors and the large jobs downtown actually hired a noise specialist just to monitor the noise to see where the noise is coming from and many times it is not even from them. >> commissioner lee? >> now that you guys brought up the noise. >> no. >> is this ordinance about the noise emitted from the machine or the equipment or the noise that the work actually makes? >> this is just the noise. >> what i was told i think that this is the noise from the equipment. >> that is what i thought too. and now you are talking about the noise complaint. and most of the complaints would not be from machines i would bet because sort of like pile driving. >> and a lot of the complaints are from the machinery. >> you get the notice complaints from the machines? >> yes. >> and yes. >> concrete, pump and we try to sell the contractors who they do the large pour not to back up, so the horn does not go on and a lot of the times it will actually ask the contractor to

reset the generator of the job and because the noise during the construction is in the joint properties and we will do the pro-active and >> and is pge and the water department, i don't see. this is, this is really hard to enforce. >> yeah. it is hard to enforce. >> yeah. commissioner? >> i think that we just have to wait and see here. >> item 7 c, update on permit tracking system. >> >> good morning, commissioners. my name is kanty and i am the project direct for dbi, we are getting really close to the user acceptance testing and execution, relative to november the 5th and that is the plan. and the execution would be over a period of four weeks, and that is the wrong two, and then we are going to do the majority

of the back office testing during. and our subject matter experts and their staff who do this every day and that they are going to be helping us with this testing. and we are planning to send out communication to the stake holders who are going to be helping us with the review and the testing of the citizen for the permitting and also, the communication, and that the actual review of the citizen portal is going to be in december. and so we are going to try to send the communication sometimes in the next couple of weeks so that they can plan for their time. the same thing will go for the citizen advisory group, and it would help us review the on-line permits and enforcement records on-line. that is all that i have, and just an update, is there any questions? >> >> is it march? is the new date? >> yes. >> the projected. >> on-line. >> the projected go live, and the projected plan is march 2014. >> okay.

>> march 2014. >> okay. >> and we are going to be sorry. we are going to be doing another round of testing. which will be towards the end or actually the beginning of january that will span into february and that will be the last round and then we will have any final reach before the go live. >> and okay. commissioner? s >> thank you. >> could i add one more thing? >> please. >> i would like to take this opportunity to thank our staff that has been helping us quite a bit in reviewing the configuration and almost every day we have somebody doing this for us and the dbi staff and the services and inspection services and it is a number of hours that they have spent and actually the critical role is played by the managers and the chiefs, they are reviewing hundreds of pages of documents every day and it is, they are giving the comments back and forth so i would like to thank their help too. >> thank you. >> with the commission, acknowledges that. >> thank you. >> item 7 d. update on major projects. >>

>> good morning, commissioners. you know, the attachment on the major project. and i want to bring your attention regarding that unit and the last page. and just roughly it is 14,000 units and will be on the market. and then, the construction costs roughly $6.2, but not including the smaller projects. and those are the highlight ones that you want to look at. 6.2 billion. >> and yeah. >> billion. >> yeah. >> but it is a little bit higher. >> yeah. >> the 14,000 units are going to be on-line, or >> i don't know when. because those are on the pipeline, you know, that is the pipe and they have not started these projects. >> no they are started and it continues. >> yeah. >> and it is a building permit at least. >> yeah. and i wonder, where does that compare to the other cities? i am trying to find that out.

>> and we are in the life of san francisco and it is the opening idea and this is the first time. >> and what you have ever seen. >> yeah. >> and then, we will be at those on the pipeline may be 20,000, we just report to the mayor office. >> so 20,000. >> yeah. >> total? >> total. >> that does not include, what is already kind of been conceptually taught about in planning, does it? >> no, including these things. this is with the permit, but the other one is on the pipeline. >> okay. >> 5,000. >> any questions for the acting director? >> no. >> item 7 e, update on code

enforcement. >> good morning, commissioners, you asked us to give an update of how the active notice of violations were for the past five years? so, including in the packet was a ces complaint, and such as the code enforcement and the cases that was brought to the code enforcement for the last five years to give you a look of what is going on with the notice of violations >> and we also have that on the housing and i will let john from code enforcement speak on that. and code enforcement places the cases and these are the second notices of violations that were referred to his division and we updated the hears and we updated the cases and so, we are getting a lot more hearings and the

director's hearings to get the resolutions on these notice of violations. we also have the violation and making sure that the inspecters are monitoring it and the code when the proper time that they just don't sit and in the bid and so we could move the process forward to get the resolution. >> the, the list is fairly self-explanatory but if you have any questions, i am happy to answer. >> for the number of open cases do you know how many cases rollover from one year to the next? >> for example, these numbers, it is very possible that a lot of the cases in 2011, was actually issued in 2009 or

2010, right? they just rolled over, and is that right? >> i think that it was sensible for you to ask for five years, because you might have some of that trimmed and it would be like when you are going back to 2009. if you had an issue like that as it goes through the years it will shake itself out. if you had similar numbers in 2009 that were somehow rolling over in 2010. and like as you go through the years, and the over all effect is that, you know, from 2009, to 2013, it was a fairly accurate picture there. and i would like the good thing to notice is that when you look at the numbers in 2014, refer

to healings and 200. and then as you go down through the list. you can see that... that the number of cases that at least been handled is way more than previous years, and we finally got our staff back. and so that would be, so that answers the 349. and like, the left-hand column is the number of cases that we received during the 2013. >> yeah. >> and the column to the right then is the number of those that have gone to healing. >> and but you expect that to be higher and you expect that to grow, right? >> and you will have some of