editorial, how would you design a protocol so that the project gets done, but also a protocol so that the other necessary stuff, either mandated legally or necessary by virtue of wear and tear, how they get done and have the least amount of impact on the tenants so we don't have appeals for the next five years on this project? >> well, i spoke to the owner a little bit about that today, even though i wasn't there for that, he was very keen to talk to me about his plans for the soft story and the work that he wants to do. i did reiterate to him when you're in front of this board or anybody, you're going to have to come up with a plan to protect these tenants. he could be a means and methods, which if you're going to be doing one part of the stair, is someone going to be out of there so many days, project management, like, week one, that's going to mean these

people aren't going to live there. you put that together, and that could be part of the documents going forward. obviously, we're talking about down the line here. i think we had one a long time ago, i think it was 1100 lombard. same issue. people got displaced for seism seismic issues, and we did have to come up with a plan to protect tenants in the building. holding them to a time code from a planning point of view is tough. but i think the owner probably wants to speak to you more about that than me, and i did say to me, and i did say tonight that he wanted to address the board on those concerns. so he's down there. >> okay. >> if you want to hear from him, maybe he can elaborate on that. >> well, if we have a question, but how many applications are there? >> currently? >> currently. >> i looked it up today, commissioner swig -- sorry, president fung.

there's two fine permits and one current permit for that building, and then, you have 50 alta, and there's a couple of permits. if you're going to do the stairs because it's -- the building's on two lots, so you would have to do duplicate permits for each time you apply for a permit, so that's something that he would have to do. >> but there's no one comprehensive? >> no. it looks like the stairs are going to be done and the soft story's going to be done. that's the way it's been filed, soft story, and then, the stair, two separate permits on 40 alta and 50 alta. >> so four together -- is that four permits? >> yeah. >> so the permits for the stairs have already been issued? >> the permits -- >> the permits for the stairs have already been issued. >> no, just filed.

there was permits ticked, and then, they got -- >> more than likely, we're going to be seeing those under appeal. >> and the soft story permits, have those been issued or no. >> pardon? >> neither the soft story nor stair permits have been issued? >> we're just trying to plan our wednesday nights. >> we can look that up on mr. sanchez' computer on here and get a better look at it. i was focusing tonight on the permit that's under appeal. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez, do you have anything? >> i have a question for you. i say zoning administrator, i guess cory would get up. during the last hearing, if i remember, they had converted a rent controlled apartment into

an office space. >> yes, we looked back at our records. the violation was corrected last summer. they sought a permit to restore that unit. there's this permit that's now before you to do further remodelling of that unit. >> okay. thank you. >> thank you. we will now hear from the appellant, miss duffy. >> good evening. hi. i think you've addressed some of our concerns already, the time that's lapsed, so that we as tenants have not been able to see the plans? just as a reminder part of what brought us here in the first place, the permits on the

stairs that were issued that said there were no occupants in the building. really what we're asking for in this whole process is really just full disclosure and transparency. it's been a fairly stressful experience and so we're just, again, hoping that we can really get some clarity in terms of plans. since we are still talking about the permit of unit five, i did want -- i believe i'm able to submit additional photographs, and i did want to show the picture of the stove that we talked about last time that was put into the building. and also, i have some pictures here that shows there's been some renovations that have been done over the course of five years. >> if you'd like, you can use the overhead when you're speaking. >> you can put it on the overhead and it'll show on the screen for us. >> okay. it's not really easy to see

here, but if you've noticed in this corner, there's wood panelling, and this used to be how the unit was when the former tenant was there? and then, when he left the property, the landlord moved in, the property management, and they renovated it to this here, where they had the office for about three years. so we've looked, and we've not found that there was any permits that showed that that wood panelling could be taken out of the building. here's the picture of the stove that was put in when there was the complaint made that it was being used as an illegal office space? this really isn't indicative of the stoves that are in the building, and at that time when they said that they had stopped working, they're using it as an office space, they actually moved the computers into this

back room here? the point is not very transparent and forth coming in terms of what was actually happening there. the other one point that i wanted to address is there is a unit that has been taken off the market for a year now. the permit there is still in good standing, and they've chosen to leave this unit off the market for -- for a year, so -- >> thank you. >> mm-hmm. >> thank you. okay. is there any public comment on this item? anyone here for public comment on this item? okay. yes, there is somebody here. if there's anybody else, if you can before -- okay. >> teresa flandrick. again, i just want to be sure that building inspectors are

not bamboozled. this is someone who's done this at other buildings, where 572 chestnut, going beyond the scope, getting permits for what looks like a simple kitchen remodel and there's yet another permit. i know that at our family home, the kitchen and bathroom were remoti remoti remoti remodelled while we were on vacation for four weeks, so i don't know how this can't be done in ten months. there's the other building that i mentioned before in terms of 427 frederick street that's a three-unit building, where he was able to force the tenants into taking a buyout or to accept an ellis act. so this is why i as a tenant

organizer and someone who also works at senior and disability action have been very concerned about the situation? there are seniors in this building, and i would hate to see them displaced by stops and starts, deliberate attempts to delay with the hopes that tenants will just give up and go away. so that is why i'm here, and i would hope that you would work very diligently in checking and monitoring the situation, whatever happens there, and that you could really follow up on that and give a timeline might be another effective way of getting the work done. so thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. we'll now hear from the next speaker. >> president fung, members of the board of appeals, my name is aaron peskin, and i am here in my capacity as a neighbor of

40 to 50 alta street. i live about 100 feet away on the filbert steps. these are my neighbors, they've been my neighbors for many, many years. i know them all, and like them, they are a part of what makes north beach, north beach. commissioners, respectfully, i think you guys had it figured out in november, five months ago. please do not be misled. after five months, no filing, they know the rules. quite frankly, if i were the client of the counselor who appeared and gave you something when you've been asking for a brief for five months, i would consider that to be legal malpractice. do not be misled. this has nothing to do with a mandatory seismic retrofit. that is not the permit that is before you. this is about an attempt to

kick out a bunch of long-standing rent controlled tenants, and the history there is very clear. i think the previous speaker just spoke to that. it's interesting that the former zoning administrator mr. sanchez said the office had been abated, but that office was moved to another building in north beach that the same project sponsor owns, and i'm pleased to hear that that subsequently has been abated. as you heard from the appellant, the original sin here is going to the city and saying that a building that is occupied has no occupants. that is a true perversion of everything that san francisco stands for. and then finally, i want to say as the neighbor, and i believe that commissioner fung, who lives nearby, that the misrepresentation -- so plead do not be -- please do not be

misled, that this building is on a cliff. that is not true. it is not on a cliff, it is not anywhere near the cliff. that is an absolutely misrepresentation. i respectfully ask that you grant the appeal. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> thank you. is there any other public comment? seeing none, commissioners, this matter's submitted. >> okay. anyone like to hear comments from the permit holder? the permit holder would like to speak. >> if you have a question for him? >> okay. so is the owner of the property in the building? okay. come on up, sir. so i'll ask the same questions that i asked your counselor.

i've got a laundry list. but were you aware that you were supposed to supply a brief for this evening's hearing? >> first of all, thanks for your time here today. my name is gerald balzer, and i am the owner of 40 and 50 -- >> you can actually move the mic -- >> yeah. hard to hear. >> good evening, commissioners. my name is gerald balzer, and i am the owner of 40 alta and 50 alta. >> so the question was were you aware that there was a brief supposed to be supplied for tonight's hearing? i spoke to my director prior to the hearing and she said she definitely notified you that plans needed to be submitted seven days prior to this hearing, is that correct? >> the plans were supposed to be submitted, not the brief. >> yeah. >> yeah, i haven't heard that. i haven't heard that. >> so the person that's representing you, is that your

full-time counsel? is he not giving you information in regards to this? where is the information that the board of apaepeals sending you? >> this is the first time i've been in city hall. this is the first time i've been in this venue. >> where is mail going that we send to you? we're just trying to determine that we're in the same place we were five months ago. so where does the address go to, to answer that. >> where does the address? >> yeah. where does the mail go to? >> p.o.b. 3301. >> do you pick up that? >> i do, or my finance guy. >> so does your finance guy does give it to you? >> so maybe you should change your address. >> i can look, but i haven't seen anything like that, and i

didn't know that. >> okay. understanding that there's always three stories, his, hers, and somewhere in the middle. >> sure. >> -- and what's before us, tonight, like my vice president said, there's a lot of rhetoric in regards to stairs and stories, but what's before us this evening is just the kitchen, and the remodel for the kitchen. but i'm actually concerned, as my vice president probably, my fellow board members, that we're going to see a multitude of appeals here. and trust me, even though you're saying no, people behind you are waving yes. so -- >> if you can give me just a minute, i'll address this as best i can. >> okay. >> i have spent a tremendous amount of time putting together a gant chart that shows the scope of the project by week all the way to conclusion. i've divided the project into

four functions, and i think that this is the type of information that you the commissioners -- >> you can place it on the overhead, and place it as if you would look at it yourself. thank you. >> so i guess i have a few minutes to speak? >> actually, we're asking you questions, but we'll let you speak. >> actually, i would like to apologize to the commissioners for not being at the last board of appeal meeting. i wasn't available, but i've never been to city hall and i didn't understand the significance. i do now, and i'm glad that i'm able to attend today. to give you an idea, i recently retired from a publishing

business here in san francisco, and now with my new time, i'm working on my properties here. i've lived here in san francisco for 40 years, and i enjoy it. i am a small businessman in san francisco, but over the years i've invested in a handful of small buildings in the north waterfront, two to four units and eight units and several six-unit buildings of which alta is included. i think if you saw the buildings, you know that i work hard to keep up the buildings so that they contribute to the beauty of san francisco, and i have a live and let live attitude with respect to the tenants in the buildings, and i take pride in providing them with quality housing. i purchased 40 and 50 alta, two six-unit buildings, in the year 2000. as was said before, it occupied an amazing position at the top of telegraph hill, and it's a

place i also call home. the building has had changes over the last 19 years, natural atrition. people have passed on, moved on, changed jobs, married, have children, however, i can always say i've respected the tenants in the building and have never done anything to interfere in their lives or enjoyment of the building. as i've aged, the building has also aged, and it's now at the point where it needs focused repair to bring it up to safety standards. these are safety standards that i'm focusing on. the city of san francisco has mandated that the building undergo a seismic retrofit, which i welcome. as it will not only protect the building, but it creates a safer home for the residents and myself. but this process in considering the costs and the work associated with the seismic retrofit, i felt that it might be the right time and probably

in everybody's best interest to use this retrofit to also bring the building up to a safer standard. there's never a right time, and i don't think these times fit everybody, but like many other property owners who have had to do retrofits here in san francisco, i think that they've included other things at that time in order to bring the building -- >> okay so sir -- >> i have a question. so i hear you, and i understand the story you're telling and kind of the process. what i'm not understanding is why the communication with the tenants seems to have been so poor during this time. if you had reason to say well, you know, we need to do it in this way and here's the plan of what we need to do, or gee, this just appeared to me, why hasn't there been open and respectful communication with the tenants who i understand have been trying to communicate with you about this. we have tried to communicate with you about this, and it seems to not have gotten

through. please explain what is the level of communication you expect to give to your tenants. >> yeah. that's a good question. i've always had a property manager. i've always relied on the experts, whether it be the attorney or property manager or architect. some of the issues i've heard about, but many of the issues, i haven't heard about. i travel a fair share, and i'm generally not involved in the day-to-day. i am today involved in the day-to-day. >> yeah. i would say a few more days after this, you might want to get a little more involved. >> yeah. so what i've done, and i've personally done -- and i will not go through it, but i will show you what i perceive to be four major components of the construction, and i've broken

them into a gant chart if you will. it's centered around number one a mandatory seismic retrofit, number two, replace what we feel are the failing upper balconies and the lower decks. providing a double-gated security entrance with retrofit, and then restoring the facade. >> so can you address -- thank you again for having this kind of layout, which is i think what the appellant has been throughout this entire process, they wanted truthfulness of the initial application, but two, the overall intention of to keep or to push out tenants?

there's been notes that some of your associates have threatened to ellis act people out. what is your intention with regards to the tenants there and their remaining tenancy in the property? >> that's a great question. i want to go back 19 years. i think if i had an ulterior motive, it would have shown itself years ago. if we can go here, there's a seismic component to the project, there is an upper deck, a reroof, an upper deck, and a lower deck repair. and because of the way the deck is on the roof, and the roof, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't been replaced in 62 years, it's got to come up. the wood is rotted. there's an entry and facade.

because it's a 1950's-style building that has an open aesthetic -- >> sir, i'm not trying to interrupt you. i appreciate a good gant chart, but the question is what do you want to happen to the tenants there? what do you want to have them continue to reside in the property or temporarily being located. >> in the gant chart, it identifies which tenants will be affected. if we looked at the plan that i had originally set out, the 40 alta building requires 23 days of relocation. the boiler room is failing and because of the stairs for the seismic. on the 50 side -- and that

affects three tenants. on the 50 side, there were ten days of relocation as seismic work is being resolved. it shows the events before and the events after, so it's pretty clear, as along as the contractor keeps to the schedule and it doesn't rain, i think we're good. i think we're good. however, i should say that there is only one aspect of the project that would be pretty serious, and that would be the upper decks. because of where the property is positioned, and there's been settling over the years, which most buildings have, the water has a tendency to follow the path of least resistance and ends up in the corner. a lot of that deck was built with regular lumber, not pressure treated lumber, so we are constantly dealing with

issues, almost on a yearly basis, that rot might show up. the plan is to replace that with a modern steel deck, and kind of like the golden gate bridge, where you only have to paint it maybe once a year, but it should provide that long-term security on the failure of that deck. i'm pretty familiar with some of the issues in san francisco and berkeley with failing decks, and i frankly don't want to be one of those individuals that has to deal with that. >> is your concern that that deck will take longer? >> there's two people, and i would be happy to discuss or to find a way to move around that. i think that that's something for maybe the contractor. if there were some way that we could get to that upper deck, and i'd be happy to show you a picture of those upper decks, then i would certainly be open to finding a solution.

>> thank you. >> but sir, you mentioned you purchased this in 2000, and you mentioned deferred maintenance. are you not -- >> scheduled maintenance, but i've aged along with the buildings, and maybe we all need a little replacement from time to time, but yes, it is. >> and just so you know, we've afforded you more benefit by speaking than we have in years that i've been here. that's why a brief is provided, so thank you. >> thank you. >> so here's -- here's my problem with this. i -- i see your -- your plan, and i -- and i hear your words, and you sound sincere, but the problem is the -- the evidence that -- that comes before your spreadsheet and your lovely

words. the evidence was an application that had a blatant lie on it that said no occupants in the building. the evidence is you took an apartment, you turned it into an office illegally, and and that kind of illegal -- illegal, unethical, and just wrong. so we have a purpose here, which is to -- from my view, unless i signed on for the wrong reasons, we're here to protect the city, we're here to protect actually yourself, and we're here to protect the tenants. and in the -- in that process if we see things that just don't pass the smell test, and

that would be an office that was illegally built, that would be a lie, mis -- conscious misinformation on an application. by not filing a brief after five months of a delay, that makes it very hard to believe your very nice words and your very beautiful spreadsheet. and we have to figure out -- and you love, but i'm not laughing, but you know what? i'm here to -- i'm really serious about my service, and i'm really serious about the three points of that protection. so i don't like laughs like that. >> no, i wasn't -- >> so i just want to let you know what you face as we momove, trying without prejudice to give you what you want but also in terms of protecting your tenants, so it's very -- for

me, it's very problematic, and i'm trying to figure out a way here. and maybe with the d.b.i.s good advice because mr. duffy is really good at this stuff, and also with legality -- in a legal fashion, with the advice of our counsel, how we organize these permits so you can have your cake and eat it, too, and so can the tenants. and so this is organized in a fashion that we don't -- we allow you to move forward that we don't hurt the tenants, but i'll tell you, it's really hard because of the evidence that's in front of you. i'd just like to advise you

fairly and transparently on this. i'd like to find out from mr. duffy when he -- thanks for stepping up, and you have been allotted very nicely and benevolently by this body more time than we have most times, but i'd like to find out from mr. duffy, his advice, when he stands up, when these permits can be scheduled, if indeed they're approved so that we don't set these tenants up for failure, we don't set them up for being displaced for an inordinate period of time. we're not accusing you, but we have landlords that get the tenants to give up. >> let the president speak. >> yes, sir. [please stand by]

>> we can have the permit holder put liaison because i will be honest, six and a half years, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it is probably a dr. even though he did a very good mia coble in front of us, the information we got was incorrect and i don't know what to do. we can either continue this on this particular case or we can ask the department to combine all the permits so that we don't get into the problem of cereal permitting, but if we combined them, that it gives the appellants less opportunity to appeal each permit. it is up to this body to -- at this point, he doesn't answer his mail, he doesn't know what is being put on the permits, so

following forward to, i can't imagine he will answer his mail or figure this out, either. >> we have had issues before where it is piecemeal, and therefore the request that has come in, can we see it consolidated? whether it is a consolidated cedric consolidated permit. >> what would you recommend? >> to me that makes the most sense. >> that makes the most sense. >> then each and every permit can be appealed or analysed. is that true, mr. duffy? >> what about what we have done in the past? >> let's hear from the department. >> i'm trying to make you work. >> joe duffy, d.b.i. i wouldn't want to be consolidating the retrofit permit with any other permits. those are standalone permits for several reasons. with rent board, we have to give a significant certificate.

i think the department his rid of them. we they have to standalone. i know we can't do and a.d.u. together, they have to be separate, so i would keep the story work away from that. i will just remind you that the permit that is under appeal tonight, it is for the model of the kitchen. that model currently has been demolished. there is sheet rock lying on the floor and stuff like that. >> it has been vacant for two years already. >> it is in a state of disrepair since the sheetrock was laying on the floor and they basically walked out and left it. >> mr. duffy, regarding the a.d.u., are there any restrictions if the landlord does eviction his? >> you need to ask that of mr.

sanchez. >> that's okay. >> mr. duffy, since you were at the microphone, i ask the question and then we digress. do you have -- what would you suggest as a protocol or an orientation so that we look forward proactively, and in anticipation of having the project sponsor complete the necessary deferred maintenance which is on the project and which obviously has to do this off story, but how can you help us get organized for the benefit of the tenants so that we don't do something that would put their tenancy at risk and put their bodies on the street, literally? >> it is a good question. d.b.i. is in charge of doing inspections primarily.

we would be going above our reach. i can make suggestions as to what they can do, but they need to have a few meetings and get a good feel together. he can come up with the means and methods of doing the work. that then puts us as a department into dangerous territory because we are not, our permits will be good for a one year and a mom and we don't know how d.b.i. could enforce someone that the contractor says , oh, i was supposed to do this and in two weeks attendant calls calls us and says, hey, they're not finished, and it is four weeks later. what covalent -- code violation is that in? it is a good idea if they can get something worked out among each other. who enforces that? that is the question. i don't think it could be our department. we wouldn't have a code violation as much as a broken agreement, so it is always an issue, and one thing that i

would suggest on the permit if i may is that maybe it is continued for them to submit this brief and again give them more time on this brief because combining this work with other work, i don't know what that does apart from -- this is a remodel of a one-bedroom apartment. i hear everybody behind me speaking against it and they synthesize with them, but this is a small remodel. if it means the owner to get on your good side to give you a proper brief, which i agree with , on plans and maybe then the address is in that brief, his plans for the upcoming work that is not under the appeal, but spells out what his intentions will be, it might get that good feel going better for the next night. >> or we revoke this permit tonight. >> where does that leave us with the apartment that is under construction? >> they will have to submit that as part of whatever else they

are going to submit. >> that is your decision. >> i agree, the soft story should be separate,. >> normally i would be sympathetic to the developer to the project sponsor because as a person in real estate, obviously an empty apartment, empty office space and empty retail space is a lack of revenue, given the fact that there has been another apartment which is purposely taken off the market for a long period of time, given that this revenue-producing appointment is used illegally as an office, my sympathy initiative to support the project sponsor in that direction is frittered away -- frittered away. i think time doesn't seem to be

a priority for him. i would rather take time to get this straight. >> so there is a permit for the removal and replacement of existing stairway, up and down direction, reverse door landing. that permit was filed on the 13 th of november. currently it has been approved by building and fire department for approval. it just needs to be paid for and issued. if you want to -- i think what i am hearing is you will add the work that is under this appeal under that permit. >> it is their choice, then, however, they want to deal with it. but the question that is raised, is how can anybody else among the tenants get a handle on what the work is? if you accept the charge, he is saying it is 23 days to redo the stairs and walls, will you and i both know that is not very much

time to do shear walls. >> no, i know. i haven't looked at that. i didn't see that. >> and the other question is, what that cover the permits that are pulled into this property? >> we have a block on it. >> we have our own, but we have a d.b.i. block on the addresses. i think i have done that at the last hearing, i noticed it today they will have to come through myself or patrick to get that permit. >> okay. , thank you. >> scott, would you like to answer my question, his mr. sanchez, sorry? >> here i thought it would be an early night. >> in regards to an a.d.u. and whether it can be evictions, there are specific eviction classes that if they have sought

addiction over -- under those classes, then you're not -- eligible. >> it would be prohibited. >> thank you. commissioners, this matter is submitted. >> who would like to start? >> i will let you, i have already spoken a lot tonight. >> i think if you looked at the impact, this particular little permit in this remodel will not impact anything very much, other then the noise and the dust. if you look at what they intend to do overall to the buildings, there is going to be a significant impact, and the question is whether or not they are going to be transparent

about that and how did they negotiate that out, given the date, i'm not prepared to accept that. so i think it is incumbent upon them to make a case of the scope of what will occur at this building, and i'm not saying it has to be only one packet, it can be a soft story packet, but it can be multiple packets as long as they're all shown at the same time. >> i agree. >> they can be separate permits, so i'm not prepared to accept this particular permit, and i would move to revoke that on the basis of needing to know information about what the overall scope would be.

>> what about having, as inspector duffy had recommended to have the permit holder provide a brief for this particular project? as you said, granted, we have heard a lot of innuendo about other things, with the permit before us is this, and they understand it is the tip of the iceberg and that is what the ten made the titanic fall, but it this point -- >> you can do that. you can continue this then and request that we receive information. >> regarding the others? >> regarding the full scope of work. whether it is in multiple pieces , including his schedules. >> that would be my suggestion that the president makes that motion. >> let me get my mind around what you are suggesting. i am hearing you are recommending -- i understand you don't want to move forward with this permit, i would agree that

you would like to continue this for the purpose of getting a full brief so that we all have information, including ourselves in the tenants and the public at large, but would that continuance coincide with the inevitable of hearing appeals on the other items? >> which is fine, but at least we have an understanding. and everyone who has a question mark has an understanding of what is before them. at which point, we always recommend a liaison be appointed as we have done too many builders that have not been cleared. >> with that, there is the recommendation of continuance which would be fine, or would we just suspend the permit? >> we would revoke it and have it come back again in another form. if he went to the continuance route -- >> on the councillor -- with the

council want to come up as to how long it would take you to provide a brief, not only for this particular permit, but for all the permits that you are planned to do at this building? >> i guess that is you. welcome back. >> thank you for having me back. >> the question is, either you are thinking of revoking this permit, or continuing it. if we do continue it, we would like to hear the substance of all your remodelling including this, a full permit set, all drawings, everything. we would like to see everything clear forward would you like us to revoke the permit? >> i'm happy with the continuance. we can present you -- >> how long would it take for you to provide the full scope of work that you are planning to do forty and 50, sorry i just moved your house, i apologize. >> and you're asking how long it

would take? >> yes. >> i had a presentation here to go and i could duplicate it to you and get it to you in two weeks. >> thank you, councillor. >> we can move it to june 9th. >> what would you recommend? >> june 19th. >> works good. >> , okay. >> are you available? >> are the appellants available june 19th? >> can we also clarify the length of the brief? >> i will let the president do this. >> we don't have a motion yet, but we should. >> and obviously given your track record, i have to point out that the track record is very good, i would recommend that your briefly bend over backwards to be as thorough as possible, every i daunted and every tea crossed in separate -- supplemented by addendum. as you come in with a set of plans, or a simple spreadsheet and try to hold it there, like

this is our plan, i wouldn't find that acceptable. >> do you like pictures. >> sure, whatever you want. you need to submitted ahead of the meeting and then they provide it to us and reread it before become so when we are here we are prepared and then have several minutes to speak. >> this is for your benefit. as i told you, we have served three masters here. so this is for our benefit as we serve you. >> i appreciate that and appreciate your hard work on this project. >> thank you. >> do you have questions, director? >> okay. , let's first have a motion. >> moved to continue this case to june 19th, permit holder to provide copies of all of his permit applications for 40 and 50 all ten -- and alta to

provide a summary describing their schedules and the scope of work. >> and commissioner honda previously mentioned a complete set of plans as well as the permit holder appointing a liaison. >> their applications will include the drawings. >> okay. >> the liaison will be talked about on the next slide. >> okay. we have a motion to continue this matter to june 19th so that the permit holder can provide a brief which includes copies of all the permit applications for 40 and 50 and the brief alta should address the full scope of work at the property and the schedule for the work. >> just a minder -- a minor -- all applications come with

drawings. >> okay. all applications, drawings. [laughter]. >> okay. , and that motion... [roll call]. >> just to confirm to the permit holder, we would need 11 copies of the brief delivered to our office on june 13th, that is the thursday prior to the hearing and you would also need to serve a copy onto the appellant. >> do you need two minutes? >> let's take what minutes. >> thank you, if you have any questions, you can call the board office. >> we will take a two minute break. >> thank you for your patience. we are going to take it watch >> welcome back to the april 17

th, 2019 meeting of the board of appeals. we are now on item number 8. this is mission beach café versus the department of public health. we are appealing the revocation on march 5th, 2019 of a permit to operate a restaurant because of serious and repeated violations of state and local health codes including an ongoing cycle of the owner operator charge acknowledgement of the operations and written assurances of correction and your immediate recidivism. this is a d.p.h. hearing, and we will hear from the appellant first. you have seven minutes, sir,. >> good evening. my name is not. >> you might want to move the microphone closer to yourself, sir, i'm sorry. >> is that better.

>> correct. >> council, president of mission beach café is here as well, and this appeal is about one issue issue only. this is the respondent's own brief and that is nonpayment of the healthcare jordans payment liability, and there's other issues of going into why that wasn't paid, but the issue that is here with the board to consider is the nonpayment and can we have time to make that payment? >> my background is primarily in bankruptcy law, and i have been the council for mr. clark, the individual in the case for the last almost two years, a long

story short, he is in the case right now, it is in the control of a trustee. assuming there is no objections, mr. clark will receive $14,000 to make that payment by may 15 th, and that is number 1, and that can be confirmed via performance, especially where the source of it is not from mrt from the bankruptcy estate with liquid funds that are already there. that money is exempt. assuming there are no objections , that money is entitled to mr. clark to receive and pledge to pay. [please stand by]

>> regardless, on top of that, again, bill clark and mission beach cafe have pledged $14,000 as soon as may 15, and from that point forward, $2,000 a month thereafter until the liability is paid directly by mr. clark or mission beach cafe or proceeds from the estate. we would just like more time to number one, fix the amount, and number two, pay it, and we can

confirm that less than 30 days from today that the first installment will have been paid. and the -- that's really what -- the main point. i can reserve for time for rebuttal, if i may. >> well, procedures, you have three minutes after this for rebuttal, so if you have other points to bring forward, you'll want to do so now. >> the only point is it's been going on for a long time. when the revenue source is taken away, it's hard to make the payments. it's not an excuse for not making the payments, but it would be an excuse for why they weren't paid on time. when an inspection happens and there's reviews that hurt the customer base, temporarily, that can affect the revenue that comes in during that period. it's not a justification, it's an explanation of what happened in the past.

in the future, there's certain payments coming soon, and i'd rather focus on actions, not promises or words at this point. mission beach cafe has been on mission street -- or in the mission for about 15 years. that's a long time. it serves the community, and a lot of people -- we attached some of their views on our appeal. you can reach them, and you can see more on-line. it would be a tragedy to have that shutdown at least without giving mission beach one final chance to make the payment in the way that i described. thank you. >> okay. >> question. >> sir, i thought you were going to make a payment a couple of days ago -- $5,000. >> correct -- well, i was not going to make the payment. >> i thought you said a payment

was going to be made a couple of days ago. >> the payment was not made, that's correct. the reason why i started with the payment has not been made, because it's actually have a bankruptcy estate that has $400,000 in liquid if you wants, and -- funds, and i had to transfer those funds to the trustee in chapter seven. i know that the funds are there. assuming the trustee allows the exemption, we'll know by may 2, then, it's there for mr. clark. thank you. >> any other questions? >> i just want to make sure i understand that you -- the cafe wants to continue to operate, is that correct? >> that's correct, yeah. >> and is the cafe owner -- is he making the payment -- not the payments, but the proper health care provisions for the current employees of the cafe?

>> that's a great question. so the question is ongoing compliance going forward. what i understand, having spoken with the city attorney, the amounts that are asseted are decide -- assessed on a quarterly basis going forward. and the overall number of individuals that receive some compensation for the business are less than 20, then, they're exempt. so mission beach cafe was in no way exempt. they have a liability. however, given the economic ups and downs, the evenings have cutback a bit, and they've reduced some wait staff, and they're now at about 18 people. and it appears as started by about march 30 -- i need to confirm all this, but as of march 30 -- >> of this year? >> of this year, yeah, they were exempt. so that would imply for quarter one, there is still liability that needs to be paid.

i don't know if that's part of the assessment or not, but for quarter one, quarter two, quarter three, and quarter four, we believe they are exempt, although we need to have the city confirm that. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. we will now hear from the department of public health. >> you haven't been before us, have you. you're a new face. >> no. i'm a new face. >> okay. we'll be nice. >> thank you for having me. my name is molly alarcon. i'm from the city attorney's office, and i represent the department of public health, and i represent karen yu and bianca polavina and monica prenderville. i think the main thing i just want to make clear is the issue

before you is the permit revokation of mission beach cafe ke cafe's permit to operate. it was grounded in the fact of mission beach cafe's violation of the local security ordinance. that was how d.b.i. determined that would be the right step. we are asking you to uphold that decision here today. so this is something that has happened before where olse investigates a restaurant, finds them to be out of compliance with a local labor law, has trouble sort of getting the restaurant to come back into compliance or to make payments on overdue amounts. olse will refer the matter to d.p.h., and d.p.h. had