. >> good evening and welcome to the february 18, 2015 meeting san francisco board of appeals we're presided over by ann lsd and commissioner fung and commissioner wilson still a vacancy when there's a vacancies the board may overrule the action by a vote of 34 rotates are not required the city attorney will provide the board with advise i'm cynthia goldstein the boards executive

director and joined by joe duffy representing the department of building inspection mr. pacheco if you could go over the please be advised the ringing of and use of cell phones and other electronic devices are prohibited. appellant and representatives each have 7 minutes to present their cases and 3 minutes for comments and minutes, members of the public are asked, not required to submit a speaker card or business card to the clerk. speaker cards and pens are available on the left side of the podium. the board welcomes your comments. there are customer satisfaction forms available.

if you have a question about the schedule, speak to the staff after the meeting or call the board office tomorrow we are located at 1650 mission street, suite 304. this meeting is broadcast live on sfgovtv cable channel directly from sfgovtv. thank you for you attention. we'll conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand and say i may speak without taking the oath pursuant to the sunshine ordinance, and thank you. we'll conduct our swearing in process if you wish to have the board give everyday weigh please stand and say i do the oath pursuant to the sunshine ordinance, and thank you. do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> thank you thank you, commissioners two

housekeeping items the two appeals on agenda 5 and 6 have been withdrawn this is regarding a street improvement permit and appeal number 14 regarding an alteration permit so those matters will not be heard item number one general public comment don't anyone wish to speak on items not on tonight calendar. >> item 3 is the boards consideration of the minutes for the february 11th meeting. >> additions, deletions, or changes delegations a number of instances the vote should be adjusted for the notion absent is zero. >> off you're right i apologize in three or four places. >> yes. i'll correct those.

>> and with those corrections move to adaptation. >> any public comment on item the minutes? seeing none mr. pacheco >> there's a motion on the floor tb commissioner fung to adopt the february 11, 2015, amendments on that motion commissioner president lazarus commissioner honda commissioner wilson thank you the vote is 4 to zero the minutes are adapted. >> item number 4 is a rehearing subject property on baltimore way we've received a letter from the appellants requesting a rehearing of a property decided on january 28th at that time the board vote do to uphold the permit the permit holder is

tiffany and the project is comply with the condition legalized bathroom we'll start with the requesters. >> good evening, commissioners so before i start, i have two exhibits i'm going to be oh, sorry i'm courtney brown a law student and we represent the tenants so before i start with the argument i have two exhibits that i'm going to be discussing and i have actual copies in the board would like them. >> can you tell us. >> one is a one page memo from a mrmger who inspected the property and one is the bathroom

being discussed that was taken by the plumber. >> is the permit holder seen either one of those of you want to use the pictures during your presentation that's fine but not certain i want the other without the permit holder. >> i'll put them up on the screen. >> so tonight we're requesting a rehearing because new facts become available during the appeal specifically during the appeal hearing on january 28th percent the permit holder in her rebuttal said she'll be willing to restore the bathrooms if it is 2k3wr5rg9d in it was her representation she wanted to never put the bombards in again and also represented the reason

that the bathroom was not legalized because she would have to put and build an additional to the bathroom to have the space that's required for the sink the toilet and the shower stall we had a plumber come in and his naimsz name craig. >> overhead. >> so he inspected the bathroom and as you can see here he discussed each the toilet the sink and the shower stall so the toilet requires a certain amount of space around that specifically in front of the toilet

and when he inspected even though the toilet and sink were noted in the bathroom he measured and was able to determine there was adequate space without addition needed to the bathroom and then also, this is a manifest in justice removing someone's bathroom especially a family of 6 that is left with only one bathroom is creating intolerable conditions in any circumstance especially for this family that has two people that are diabetic so those are pictures of the bathroom and as you can see it's an actual bathroom we're not talking about a small space there is adequate space in this bathroom for everything

to be under so we're requesting a rehearing so the plumber can come in and discuss more about his findings that's all i have for you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> okay. ma'am you have 3 minutes as well. >> hi i'm tiffany i thought there were rules on submittal of exhibits i did not get to review their exhibit i couldn't read it not guilty in the plumber is reputable the plumb i had come out is licensed and with a great reputation when the shower doors on and the

toilet in the space that was in there was not enough clearance that's that. >> i don't understand how? why? they're asking for an appeal board unanimously voted to keep the permit in its current it uphold the permit i don't understand why we're here and if dbi or the board of appeals has the ability to grandfather the bathroom in i'll put a fixture toilet and sink back in there whether or not we have an additional one plump swais says one thing and another plump another thing i know there's a pipe i feel like when you on the walls there's a huge issue with unforeseen

unpermitted and illegal issues if i was to legalize the bathroom it will cost me on amount of money i don't have that in my budget that's the bottom line i did not take the bathroom out to disrupt their lives they made a complaint that's all i have to say thank you. >> ma'am the question is while the tenant appeals go through their course are you willing to put this bathroom back in as is. >> i'm only willing to put the bathroom in if i'm not required to take it out i've paid a plumber one hundred and writing to dollars oakland army base an hour to take it out i'm not in a

position to put it back in and take it out in 3 months thank you. >> mr. duffy anything? >> good evening, commissioners joe duffy dbi i don't have too much to add on this question our notice of violation gives people the option to legalize or remove that's what this one g did to legalize or revert back to the use i don't see my plans to show you how it could beleaguer listed maybe there's some part could be legal and the photographs show you some space in there but we do give people the option

i choose to remove it maybe it can beleaguer listed i don't have enough information we only give out the codes and let people to design to meet the code the grandfathering maybe something we can use but dbi can't do that it has to meet code maybe a way to legalize if. >> can you i'm sorry are you finished refresh our memory on the nov it was for an unpermitted bathroom or because the clarence's were not appropriate and the notice of violation was for a final inspection for the rear deck that is still to be dealt with we give them the permit to remove the deck under a separate

permit and. >> second bathroom was constructed without the benefits of a permit and permits failed to produce eliminates to alternate or remodel this building to its present configuration i made a copy and to apply to legalize the current codes and revert it back to the legal use to answer your questions the the shortcomings or the code so - and okay. no members of the public so commissioners the matter is submitted or other members of the public. >> i think the evidence presented this evening was the same evidence presented at the last hearing the standards for rehearing are clear and the

manifest has to be proven on a personal level 8 persons living in a bathroom is just i grew up in a family of 9 with one bath so i'll deny personally. >> i'm not quite of same opinion of the bathrooms that's okay. that's a personal thing i think we've gone through the process and you know it may have been better for them to include it as part of their negotiations in terms of the tenant fees, however, i don't see any reason to rehear this case. >> go ahead.

>> motion to deny the appeal for rehearing on the grounds that what would be the grounds. >> you don't have to restate only deny it. >> there's a motion from the investing on the floor to deny this rehearing request commissioner fung commissioner president lazarus commissioner wilson thank you the vote is 4 to zero it rehearing request is denied. >> okay. thank you commissioners the last item on your calendar is our consideration of the budget proposals for fiscal year 2016-2017 and we have it on calendar tonight because the city law requires we submit our budget to the mayor this time in

february we need to do that in february i want to give you an update and dpoefr the proposal that is pretty self-assured for the next couple of years if you look at the materials you were given on the third and fourth piemgz the grafts are pretty familiar they're similar in the annual report the first one is 9 revenue budget and give us a picture of where the revenues come from. >> we're saving money together. >> and we appreciate the city attorney by leaving the room and saving us money thank you. >> see you next week. >> so we have the surcharges that represents 95 percent and the next package is the funding

this is the same pie chart where 2/3rd's of our expenditures go to cover the salaries and 19 percent for the city attorney and outlet work orders with other departments and then. >> - >> we're losing our evening. >> this is the most people we've ever had (laughter). >> but on the next page page 5 you'll find it a little bit more interesting something new that chart is not new with the appeal but we're projecting for the upcoming fiscal year last year, we have a slight in the appeal volume and went below the average number of appeals for the first time in about 5 years but it looks like the appeal is down again, i think that perhaps last year's spike was less to do

with the comforted economy and the apt apt appeals that increased our numbers we're back to the fiscal year 2013 rate. >> have you done the calculation. >> it's 41 so to the same one hundred and 60 something appeals per year but if we keep on going we'll be back to one hundred and 60 something okay. so moving and looking at 79 current year budget on the revenue side we'll end the year is is surplus and looking at a small deficit in the filing niece but the surplus we're seeing will offer come that deficit and then be some so 32

thousand by the end of the year roughly and on the expenditure side we look to the projected so we'll have savings there there was a clerical position that become vacant so we have fringe savings and some of the costs with the processing of the appeals since we're having two appeals that went projected will be saved as well so when we order the address notification for the requirement the sf sfgov coverage and all of that will be down a little bit and expect about $85,000 in expenditure savings so we are going looking at $118,000 in the black by the end of the year that money b will go do the rhd - rainy day fund then turning to the budget

for the next two fiscal years coming up 2016-2017 be looking at the revenue side first, we will need to continue to evaluate the surcharge rates to make sure those rates s are sgiend to capture the efficient amount of money to cover expels but their generating revenue for the different departments for instance florida dbi appeals represents 60 percent the surcharge will generate 60 percent of the boards budget in april we'll get data from the various departments on the projection for the volumes for the coming year and link that information with the information we have on our appeal experience to figure out what the right

proportions are for the department and look at the surcharge rates to be adjusted the controller has the authority to adjust them up if firefighter adjustments are needed we'll take that to the board of supervisors. >> i move 3 even though their dbi defer time cases their because of planning. >> we actually breakdown that so when we give this to the controller we separate out the number of appeals dbi only and 3e7b9 appeals and the appeals that have the planning components to them and also separate the va ones we separate that and the surcharge for each the different planning and dbi. >> so it is calculated. >> yes. on the fee side no

proposed changes it's a small pox and comes in the same amount and we left that alone expenditures in the next few years we're looking at a small there those increase is tied to the agreement that were entered into last year the infringes in salaries and fairly minor and they're off set slightly by a change in the job clarifications so when the clerical position became vacate last year it was changed in a jen clerical job to a legal clerk that gave us a better pool of applicant applicants that have experience in the documents like the ones in the office and fortunately for us it is a position that is less expensive

so we'll have salary savings as far as non-expensive savings to the work orders we're paying for the staff time for the city attorney and the folks running the cameras but i don't expect expenses to go up the largest contractor was an outside vendor that gives information for the neighborhood notification and we negotiated a 3 year charter we're in the first 3 years so it will remain flat for the next two years going forward the recommendations are simply to work with the controller and the mayor's office to work on the proper surcharge rates in a particular to look at the dpw rate is suggested not only because of the cases but the other increases in the types of

cases we're seeing from the department perhaps a reduction in the rate that is charged for sfpd cases there are so of you of those in the last few years and look at whether we should broadened the types of cases at dpw not only tobacco cases but restaurant operation permits and massage parlor permits and no sewer a charge on the applications and, of course on the expenditure side to continue to monitor our interest closely to make sure we stay within budget. >> dpw is pending legislation about their green zones so we'll probability see an increase because of that so maybe there should be some adjustments. >> the materials is the details if the president to get two the

weeds and the surcharge rates and itself filing fees we're currently charging so hoping that you will adapt the budget proposal so we can submit them next week i'll be happy to answer any questions that you have. >> only one question. >> yes, sir. >> are we still the smallest department in the city by budget. >> i don't know the answer to that i don't think so but we're within the bottom two. >> or 3. >> whether we were expanding our broadening points of interest we're shooting at some numbers. >> the smaller in the number of staff are larger in grants. >> other comments. >> so i think you know the

budget you've got a good handle on and you know it's interesting perhaps just a one point for my fellow commissioners like the analysis that the director has on not only this by the way looking at effort of all of us for the types of case by the types of permit it is quite interesting that the preliminary results that she's developed is that some of the cases take a long time to resolve it is not necessarily a strike correlation between our amount of effort but perhaps something she'll continue to look it over the next year. >> absolutely. >> questions.

>> first of all i commend you on the way you manage the budget i think it is terrific that you've managed it to generate the surplus and create the day fund it's a sensible approach it's tough you don't have a lot of control over the aspects of it which leads to my question i really don't have much discretion do you in really the major line items. >> certainly not over salary and fringe the bulk of the budget i was only able to reclarify some things over the year i don't even though with the city attorney and the sfgovtv there's with the city attorney there's a negotiation of the number of available hours likely to be but not control over who my city attorney is i think robert is

but what his rate is with other city attorney's. >> is there a difference in city attorney's. >> yes. because of level of responsibilities yes they get billed out at different rates as a lawyer that's been there for 25 years there's the mailing that has 6 hundred pieces that's the mailing we don't get to say no to the mailing. >> in terms of the rent again, i'm sure you have no control over that; right? >> we've been fortunate it real estate has left our rent flat no control. >> i mean unfortunately, the way our surcharges are structured we don't have the risk to be able to afford to

stay in our space we can adjust those. >> it wasn't that long ago i'll have to pay rent why are rehaving to pay for city services which pretty much are in the budget you know anyway lost that battle a long time ago. >> remind me what specialized services. >> the companies that gives us the notification. >> the interpreter and right interpreters right exactly. >> and then one other small thing some of these items are i mean it's by the numbers are very specific and in 2s and 4s and 8s and all it do you for