thank you very much. >> i would like to make a correction to the tables in front of you, if you are taking an action for voting on this. if you look at table one p apartment license fee, that is a 7% for reduction, but that is not charge for services rereduced the charge for services, that is a fee attached to the owner of the building for property bill, so we would say that we would keep it as it. >> what page is that on? >> that is actually you would have to look at item six. it's the red line of the actual fee schedule. >> sorry taras. >> i think it's table one p.. >> let me get it for you.

>> i got it. >> this is the fee table that would change now it would include the 7% it will include eliminating technology surcharge. >> when my industry askses me we're talking about 7% with the possibility of two more percent with the technology? is that the way you would sell it? >> well we're talking about 7% generally, with the 2% for the technology surcharge, if you look at the tiers it's going to adjusted slightly more. >> do we have it at 10%? or it's difficult to say because the only place it fluctuates is the building and plan review those are the two based on evaluation

the others are strictly 7%. >> commissioner walker. >> i want to be clear, in the next few years, we're going to be losing money to get rid of our fund balance, you are actually putting in a set of fees, where we actually don't cover our costs. >> that's correct. >> it's called balancing the books, isn't this? >> well, in some -- >> sorry deputy. commissioner lee. >> i apologize for missing the last two meetings, i realized i could have watched the meetings is there discussion provided by over-the-counter, versus submittal plans? i see some where in the presentation or in the package we recognize that possibly, why we're getting a big surplus is because we're getting efficient with the large

projects a lot of projects are application submitted over the count ear counter. is there any of that into the decision? >> over study, it says we do it -- the cost is less. >> correct. >> true. >> do we factor that into our study? >> so mgt, the consultant did not factor into the study he used that one of the reasons why costs are low, but as randy had said before shg the whole purpose of that study is if you bring in 15, the idea you should spend 15. so he identified a couple of things, if you look at the back of the report you will also see that dbi fees are a lot lower than places even though

we're collecting a lot of money. all of that the purpose of the fee study is to say you are not supposed to be bringing in significantly more than what you are -- >> exactly, what i'm wondering is most of the over-the-counter projects are lower evaluation, and they're paying more? they're paying the same as if it was the same rate as with the larger projects is that correct? >> well, so the difference between what the study does and dbi, fees for planning permit the study is based on hourly staff and some administration costs, plan review fees and building permits are not based on that it's based on evaluation later, you will learn more about the cost schedule. so that's the

difference. the study did not say one is paying more than the other, in fact i think the study is saying, particularly for the large projects, there should be more tiers that's why we have those tiers. >> i see. okay. >> thank you deputy. >> welcome. >> commissioners no more questions? okay, next? >> seven, there needs to be, i guess item six is for discussion and possible action there a vote on the building code fee table? >> excuse me can the motion include the change to table one p.? thank you. >> so the motion is i guess question if someone wants to have discussion and possible action to amend the code, fee

table, one a-a-one a-q and one a-s including the changes to one p. >> i'm not ready to make a motion, i would like to generate some discussion. >> okay. >> i understand the fund in balance, i know the problem with that we have to try to even things out i'm very worried about the fact that we still have a lot of pending costs that will exists whether the building boom continues or not, i'm especially worried about the need to relocate our officers whatever we're setting aside for the new office whether we have to build it buy it or rent it. part of the thing -- we're going to suffer the same problem that other people are suffering from from the building boom it's going to cost whatever we think

is goes to cost i think it's going to coast more. so i'm worried about that if we cut our fees, i'm also worried about the fact that, some of the other things we have been trying to improve, which is our housing division pushing more more routine inspections, we're supposed to do or pushing for more, the staff to do more to cut back on nov's, the notice of violations, that just kind of stand out there. that all requires -- we're pushing the staff to do a lot more, we have not hired everyone yet i know some of that is accounted for in the fee study but i wanted to raise those comments to my fellow commissioners. >> commissioner melgar. >> i'm worried about those things but i think our finance director is a rock star i think

she has taken into account, the first of your two comments, i don't know about the second. that's what i would like to understand, what our process is going forward. because we approve our yearly budget every year in it there are a bunch of policy decisions, statements of our values in terms of where we're going to spend our money and, you know, i hang out at the mission, where there's been a rash of fires, due to bad condition, as a gentrification, of the neighbor accelerates shg we probably will want to put more resources into inspections. and i think we have the lee way to do that. so my question is if we are decreasing that fund balance at a faeser rate than projected due to changing conditions or changing policy priorities what is then the

mechanism for adjusting those fees? do we have to go through the whole fee study again or can we say well these are our costs, we went through it faster, because our policy priorities changed. then we can go back we would have to go through another fee study again, the controllers office recognizing how volatile we are. as randy said earlier, we start the study at the end of 17, so by 18, we will have a new fee study in place if something happens f we find our spending down our fund balance quickly, if we find there were unfunded initiatives, the department has to take on that is impacting the department's fees too, that would be taken into consideration in the next fee study. as it relates to actual

positions. we based our budget on what we can hire and increases there, taken into consideration, what the expenditures, we believe will be for the next year and following year. you hear this from me every month, you can put a lot of money in the budget, but you can only spend so much at a point in time that's why we have had $70 million funds, budget and last year we spent 49 million. we're trying to be realistic, yes, we have to increase staff but recognizing the processing for increased staff, also, baby boomers are starting to retire we're filling positions, i can give you a long list of positions, i think we have done 30 since january, people are retiring too. with that net there. we have tried to be good at

estimating do an accurate estimate, of our revenues sh and expenditures, based on what we think the expendures will be over the next three years, and the fund balance right now, the department would not be able to do what needs to be done. i don't have a chrissal ball at this point in time it looks like we will be able to sustain ourselves. >> commissioner? >> i concur your thoughts, we are naming tea leaves here, i know it's part of the commissioner's to not reduce fees they fight hard to make sure that doesn't happen for a lot of reasons, because of programs, that need to be funded that have struggled in the past because of money that has not

been there, i respect that at the end of the day we're man daters, to do this that is in our charter, that is correct, we have to deal with this the best way we can, and plan as best we can go forward, based on past experienceses, if things do change, i have total confidence in our staff, and the city offices, to regulate and figure that outgoing forward, as we said in 2018 we could revisit this if we find situations, we are losing money and need to take a look at our fee structure again. thank you so much. >> is there a motion? >> did somebody call it? >> move to revise the fee schedule. >> second. >> a motion and a second is

there any public comment on this item? seeing none i will do a roll call vote. >> president mccarthy yes. vp mar yes. clinch yes. lee? yes. mccray? yes. melgar? yes. commissioner walker? no. >> motion carried 6 to 1. update regarding concerns with removal of debris in the candlestick park. >> on this what are the time frames, the three minutes for public comment? >> yes. >> three minutes, and presentation from the staff. >> it will be a staff presentation. and are you going to mention any updates about the visit? >> no. >> okay, then public comment following that.

>> morning commissioners, deputy from dbi, i'm here on the demolition of candlestick park. per request last month, we have inspectors going there on a daily basis, to observe the dust control plan we are satisfied with the dust control plan the area quality control project, along with the health department project since the last meetings shg we did have meetings with a dbi, we had meetings, with the clean air alliance group, and two more, to address our concerns, with the health department. with the quality management ocii, with the

contractor they made some change -- (audio cut out).

>> for copd these are all things we're well aware of, both as a public health leader and as a medical provider we're focused on eliminating those disperties, for instance we have a federal grant, called reach. sen sense tracks, where population is at 30% of the population live at the poverty level and have low educational

attainment, we have moneys to increase physical activity focus on after kin american and latino populations health. i see past and present -- just like you heard in testimony in forms of current trucking traffic, permitted stationary sources, as well as lots of housing, that causes and exsass bate asthma i'm involved with that with a children's program and air quality program. if you remember with the air quality program, this is the exposure zone of our city this is where modelled air pollution is known to be higher

in the very smartest particles 2.5, which are associated with the diseases i talked about. part of the baby most effected is the part closest to road ways and also permitted industries. and the bay view this is a much smaller graph to look at, the second line 4.4 of the bay view parts are in that zone. unfortunately, parts of mission bay are even worse at this time. one of the speakers spoke about institutional realism, and trama this is a legacy, our department is involved in, 75 managers, have received a three day rational humility training, continuing today, 100% of the dph staff

are required to go to trauma impact, to understand tra maw in our clients and population, in that context, that does form our work, that's why we have held the meeting, you have asked us to hold for community member, all of our agencies to give entitlement, your agency, to grant demolition and construction permits, we're part of regulating daily activity we're obliged for this as with any other project. that is our method of operation, in this case, we have been asked to do more, we're providing daily spot check, that would normally in other projects, would be monitored by independent consultants, and asked to hold a

forum of meeting with neighbors, and address their concerns the result of the interagent meetings, with the clean air alliance, you were provided with a handout from last night, unfortunately. 51815 agency, back lid urban commitments, we claim air quality concern, does this table look familiar? >> i don't think we have anything -- >> this will go on record to be provided, to facility the conservations, between our agent ses, lanar, and clean air alliance, it's a rolling record of everything we discussed, what the outcomes and pending actions are. it's just to show you our level of accountability to not just say something, but have a place holder for what is in progress. this is how we have resolved many of the concerns, i

will call on johnson of urban, to talk about the updates, when i'm compleeded. for example, there are three different categories of the things we have talked about. i labelled them communications, dust control plan and air monitoring. examples of the increased dust control practices shg has included. dust missing divide air pressure horses used by firefighters, and additional end of shift, and weekend waters and dust files, where a weekend worker is coming in for four hours, five, saturday, sunday, so it's not saturated, so the dust does not blow you probably saw some of the photos in the paper on friday lanar was being criticized for that use of water. but this is the

technology that we use to surprise stef this is what is expected of them. and in the end, it is true for arisolize watering, they must use waters, for things they use on the ground trucks, they can use recycled water. again, in your april meeting, there were certain things i wanted to clarify, otherwise, we keep using a lot of time and things that doesn't have to be used, i want to briefly review the role of our regulatory role versus third party consultant. our job as health department is to set the bar, what are the expectations, has to be approval of the dust control program, which is developed by lenar's, environmental consultant. [inaudible] does the same thing, investigation plan that is warranted, currently, it has not

been established for candlestick. then we have very large corporate entities who put specialized people on the site this is an example of who has been on the site until now. ngo, that designed you can see they have many sophisticated environmental specialties, these are companies that work all over the world they have industrial hygienist like myself, to design with the subcontractors, air monitoring programs that would show that show the dust does not migrate off the seat. then there say smaller local contractors, alvian partners, that is a good thing for construction project, that's where additional eyeballs come that he make the work force feel they're being observed, that is the same as

our spot checks, we want to trust the people are doing the right thing, when you combine daily check, that is reinforcement to behavior their job, both sets of consultants is to correct any patterns, that dust and es bes toss control issues are not effective, and get those corrected right at the moment. regulatory agencies we have two here with direct enforcement authority, that is dbi inspection that granted the permit and bay area quality district, their eyes, look at those things they can give violations, the job is not the same as environmental consultant, they were not intended to be resourced for the level of over sight, one of the things that i heard, dph has to check the monitoring every day, and get back to people, that is not our job that is requirement

for them to have qualified consultants that do that. those consultants are the ones that are responsible to have over sight of air monitoring data. we can look at it add our opinions, and ask questions shg but we're not part of daily operations. we have put all of that data by request of the clean air health alliance we have made every piece of those things we would get on the over site roll is on the website, at oc i. curtesy of town send drew. i additionally have to write introductory remarks for each of the pieces of data that are there. that shows what does this data mean? we have done this in a friend leeway we have reviewed this language with clean air health alliance they were fine for us to go ahead and

post it. similar handout describing the particlate matter the long black strip is the size of a hair, the blue circle spears, that's what ore equipment is measuring, anything equal to or smaller, than the blue circles, and the red circles that are smally inbedded in the blue that is all of the study health literature all the stuff that can get into your lungs, and pass blue the bloodstream and all the things that can be effect your health. i think we can show examples of what that looks like but, i want to emphasize this monitoring has action levels that are not intended for health impact, the health inspection

level is about something needs to change to help and guide the contractors, for health practices, sometimes levels are reached because of conditions, have to do with fog mist and not having to do with construction practice. they do hold the contractors accountable, one of the concerns putting out internal management and not education public tool i can't expect all lay people to understand even though i try to make it more understandable it's an unreasonable expectation that they should be for public understanding. lastly, we have had a lot of information talked to us about wind speed and all construction plans that have been dust

control plans until now, improved with our agency, has had sht down work wind speed. certainly, there is things you need to do before that to improve and enhance your dust control, i asked lenar ir ving to give us a chunk of data every ten minutes, a in the yellow column are wind speeds these all happen to be below 15. they're much smaller numbers and clearer health alliance ask that we have cut off at 15 and at 20 at different times, they have asked for those things for my own education, i look at this data, and took a two week period and what did i learn during the two week period, from

march 13th-thirty-first. this is a scale that gets used for compare sons it's the both work wind scale 13 to 18, it's a moderate leaves, kus can be lifted up, branches can be moved, and 25 miles an hour is brush where small trees, begin to sway. in that two week period, there is only one sample, 110 minute interval out of -- let's just say 18 days, 24 hours of data is about 26,000 minutes. so looking at everything above 15, that was 760 minutes, that was 3% of the total time period, 110 minute interval alone, at 9:30 at night, had a wind speed of 29.7.

then 9, 10 minute intr intervals, between 20 and 24. there was 12-10 minute intervals, next to each other, and 66 times, there were wind speeds, between 15 and 19, sometimes they were consecutive three dates, that pasted three minutes in duration those are times we would be expecting the contractor to making extra effort, to control their dust if they found they couldn't control it that's where they needed to stop work that's how the dust control is managed. >> just on that point, is it an hour, consistent wind blowing for an hour or just ten minutes? >> in that 15 minute time period they're aware of this change in wind speed, they need to make changes, if they can't control it, then it stops there is no specification, how long it needs to last