>> we share those numbers. we'll share those numbers with you during the upcoming update on permits. of course, we're also processing many permits on paper. the majority of the permits we're issuing right now are in fact online.

the reporter also as we know questioned the deputy director for inspection services position. as you probably know, our charter allows me to appoint someone to the job. but i wanted to open it up so we could have a fair and open and transparent process in choosing that position. the best candidate may be here in-house or the best candidate may in fact come from somewhere else. the posting in particular was approved by the city department of human resources. it adheres to the city guidelines for job recruitments. we did revise the notice soon after posting, because we realize the time frame should in fact be longer. the minimum qualifications are in line with the responsibilities of the position suspecters typically start in the trades and most don't have a agree.

requiring the degree for a deputy position would be mean many of the most qualified candidates with the on-the-job experience and knowledge would no longer be allowed to apply. that's not the best way to get the best candidates. i've stood here in front of you and been honest about the challenges we're going to face and what we're doing to fix long-standing issues in the department. change, as you know, doesn't happen overnight. inaccurate and misleading attacks in the local online publication don't deter me from the important work that lies ahead. >> president mccarthy: thank you. is there more comments from commissioners? >> no. maybe a slight -- director, i appreciate that and appreciate some of the clarity behind the

particular position in question. i think for me, it really is thinking through, again, right, there's a lot that is said within the article, which you know some things i pointed to i don't necessarily agree with. other things that are truly something to keep in mind is this avoiding the nepotism piece. i'm not saying this position is that. it calls to questions other items that could play into the broader kind of views that we see in terms of favoritism, that could happen. i'm not saying they are. it's something that could be happening and something to be cognizant of. it's ensuring there's transparency. it's going to be great for the department and general public, which is something we're always fighting this battle, this perception. but also, will hopefully help with the diversity pool of who

we're hiring for these particular positions. the transparency and openness is going to be the best way to operate. i think this, instead of appointing a position directly, opening this up for applicants to be able to apply, was important. and ensuring that we have an adequate timeline for people to be able to apply and know about it is also very important. >> president mccarthy: thank you, commissioner. if i may say that i believe in good government. and i believe in transparency and accountability. and i believe in looking forward and not, you know, dwelling in the past, you know. and i think we're -- that's the effort under way here. and for me, finding the very best for my greedy purposes, finding the best person for the job is at the forefront of my mind. so that they can help me and the department and the industry and

the community in general be in a better position. >> thank you director. >> president mccarthy: commissioner jacobo, will you walk me through the nepotism. i see it in the paper all the time. what's your understanding nepotism in the department? you know? >> commissioner jacobo: i hear you. i can't speak from the journalistic take or where it lies within the department. i can tell you this idea of hiring people that are relatives, family friends, et cetera, can always lead to issues, not just, you know, things of like the very nefarious accusations of corruption et cetera, but managial issues of having your family network working within the department. i think when you have that with the overlay that i hope will be presented with the former

director and other things that happened in the past, it's important to have that in mind when we're looking for our next candidate. director, i appreciate your point of clarity and expressing your greedy purposes wanting the best candidates you could get for jobs. i think that's how we should operate. i think we're doing that. this is hopefully an example of transparency we're pushing forth. i'm saying again because this is perception and what is out there, it's incumbent on us to ensure we're doubling down on transparency and how we're doing things. >> i just, reading the articles, i think it's an attack on the infinite pool of people that try to bring the person to government and work in the government and bring their expertise. i mean, if you look at every police department, if you look at every fire department that we

say just because i as an nephew want to follow my uncle's steps, where are we going with this? here we are with departments. and i'm confused as to why -- i want to know, commissioner jacobo, are you saying it's just d.b.i. or all departments? i'm curious. >> commissioner jacobo: no. i think this could be problematic in many places. i think the difference between a police department with has a whole swath of what is not happening correctly and how it should be improved, when we look at this in terms of department of building inspection and the investigations in the past and issues that have happened, it has a secondary layer of doubt and public mistrust, which opens

the conversation what is really happen and really going on? and has extra scrutiny. to be honest, unfortunately, because of the past and what has happened, it's a valid critique. how are we hiring? who are we hiring? i don't think it's predominantly in the grant entity. i think we can acknowledge biases exist and people have prejudices in how they operate. i don't want to go on a tangent on that. but just for the department in general, of course some of these are true. it's true there's been impropry tees and things that shouldn't have been done that is bad government. not that the actual critique is valid, could or could not be. but the questions raised and called for i think are important to raise the level of conversation and the level of transparency. >> okay. thank you for that, commissioner jacobo. >> president mccarthy: commissioner alexander-tut,

please. >> commissioner alexander-tut: thank you for the openness, director, on this issue. i just have a question. because the implication of the article is that this job description is a new job description that was created for this particular person to fit in. is this an old job description? or was this -- it is a new job description? i think that this would help us understand the context. >> thank you for that, commissioner alexander-tut. i think it's fair to say this job was never posted in the past, because the charter allows for the director to be the appointing officer for the three deputies. so again, in an effort to -- you know, as i've stated many times, i believe in good government. and i think we should hold true to our values. in an effort to, you know, be transparent and accountable, we decided we would post this position even though in the past, i don't believe it ever was posted. these were just appointments

that were made by the director of the day. and you know, it's really -- in trying to do the right thing, you know, sometimes you bring this additional conversation into the room. but i still think it's doing the right thing. and you know, wherever the best candidate will come from, i mean, we -- again, like i said, i want to find the best candidates no matter where they come from that can serve us in the best way. that will be good for me and good for the city and you as a commission. it will be good for everyone. so i mean, i think again to your point, we posted it out of a sense of wanting to do the right thing in regards to accountability and transparency. >> commissioner alexander-tut: thank you. can you describe -- at any point, tell me if i'm out of bounds. i don't want to do that. can you describe what the -- how

did you get multiple applications? was there a hiring -- was there an interview panel? what was the hiring process like? >> well, it hasn't happened yet. i believe we have several applications. i don't know for sure how many it is that we have. but we -- i mean, we haven't embarked on the interviewing process or the selection processes yet. i believe the posting just closed, i want to say -- tarsa is chime in. i believe it closed last friday or the friday before. >> the job closed on i think last friday. so now, the h.r. department is looking through all the applications and determining who is meeting minimum qualifications. and the next step from that will be set up interviews.

>> president mccarthy: how long was it posted for, taras, for the record? >> two weeks. >> president mccarthy: is two weeks standard or short? >> traditional, we post positions one week to two or even three weeks. >> president mccarthy: so it was within -- >> yes. a lot of times, we try to post because we have vacancies because we're trying to fill these positions quickly. we have tried to have postings as quick as possible. but we also have to make sure that we get a qualified applicant pool and a large applicant pool. so it depends on the applicant pool. >> i just want to say i'm sensitive to the education question or the education

question -- or not just populations locally. but i know you can have a college degree externally outside of the united states that may not be -- you cannot use for credit sometimes in the united states. or your high school diploma may not carry weight in the united states. so there's a lot of really -- i'm sensitive to the comments around what does an educational requirement mean. i'm also reflective that the specifics of our department, you know, may not represent the full immigrant body of the construction industry as well. and so i just want to everything -- and i -- i do hope

that our hiring processes and all of our processes do help us achieve those goals. process is important. it does not predict outcome. at least, process is important. i'm grateful for this -- for president mccarthy bringing up these are jobs that, you know, people can rise up into the construction industry into this department. and i think that's the very good thing. and i think we also want to make sure there's processes. and that that is available to everybody. and that those, you know, invitations in i guess are widely, you know, distributed into the communities that we have -- that these good jobs continue to be available. but i would say, you know, thank

you for the questions. and thank you for your openness, director. i do -- i did look at other 0900 series. it does seem a little unusual to waive all education requirements. but i do understand that there are kind of implied experience within the job description. and i think you've heard some of the concerns that from the commission in general around hiring and certainly, you know, not with the position but in general in making sure our leadership in the department reflects, you know, the full breadth of san francisco. >> president mccarthy: anymore

more questions? >> commissioner mass his hand raised. >> thank you. i want to say i think it would be good for us to consider -- i think a lot of issues, whether justified or not, are coming in as a sense of is there or is there not equal access to the bulding inspection commission both from the people who work there, want to work there. and contractors trying to use it i think this whole sense of do you need to have the monetary ability to hire someone to expedite your process? you know, what does that do to access? what does that do to fairness of the process. i think all of these things are jumbled in together to get an article or few articles that come out. or maybe they focus on one thing or another. are we hiring? are you open. do you have to be a rich developer? things like that. i think they're born in a sense of inability of a lot of people to access the building inspection department in the past. i do really want to say as affordable housing developer,

leaps and bounds the bulding inspection commission made this year in terms of modernization and access are -- cannot be understated. but i also think it would be good for the commission to keep in mind for a lot of people -- because we have to separate these things into hiring or expediting or whatnot. i think for the public, which is who we serve at the end of the day, i think for a lot of them, it's jumbled into one thing. it would be good for us to keep that in mind as we have discussions. >> robb kapla. we have item 11 which gets to these issues. i want to reserve this time for inquiries to staff rather than deliberation too much on matters that may require commission action. so this should be reserved for questions directly to staff. >> president mccarthy: thank you, commissioner moss, your comments are appreciated. >> thank you. thank you to my fellow

commissioners for their comments. this is for interim director o'riordan. i want to commend you for putting this out there and being transparent and doing a search the right way. what is the time frame usually now that the applications have closed, when do you think the process will sort everything out and actual lie have one be in the position? how long would it take. >> do you mind if i defer to you on that? it's more of an h.r.-related question. >> taras madison, deputy director of the bulding inspection commission. there isn't a normal time frame because it depends on a variety of things. hopefully within the next week or so, h.r. can look and determine which applicants are qualified. and then, we'll establish interviews. we have to get an interview panel. we'll set up interviews.

there's a lot that will happen even once -- once we get past the interviews and decide to make an offer to someone, that's depending on finger printing of that person. it's also dependent how much notice they have to give. there isn't really an estimate that >> will: be completed by. but what i have to outline is just the steps, the normal steps that normally occur. interview, meeting minimum qualifications determine who gets to interview. interview panel, having an interview panel. for something like this, there may be possibly an interview and ensure with the time if we'll see that. and also, working with the selected applicant. because we have to choose someone. but everyone that is selected in the city and county of san francisco have to go through finger printing. and the applicant, if they're

working, we want them as soon as possible but don't want them burning bridges with another employer. we expect them to give notice. >> president mccarthy: thank you, taras. i want to be respectful to robb kapla's point here. we are diving too deep in the personnel issues in the public forum. if that's okay. if i may ask, are there other commissioners? okay. is there public comment? >> i will do 7-b and we can do public comment on both items. >> president mccarthy: okay. >> clerk: 7-b is future meetings and agenda. at this time, the commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a special meeting and/or determine items that could be placed on the agenda at next meeting and future meetings of the bulding inspection commission. our next scheduled meeting is

march 17th. >> president mccarthy: thank you. >> there are two people on the line. sorry. >> clerk: you're fine. >> there are two people on the line. caller 650678, you're unmuted right now. >> thank you. i would like to approach this from three points. one of the challenges i observed in 2012 when i was on the civil grand jury was the policies. they were 1986 policies. so i think it's important to pars systems from business processes. and when you look at the business processes, the question becomes: why are the processes -- why do they require an expediter? so that could do a lot, short of changing the systems, looking

in-depth at the business practices and asking why is an expediter required? the second thing is the leadership team. it's important to have on-site and leadership skills. the past board required technical, managial and leadership skills. i would think whoever the director is would want a team that has all of those skills. and certainly, the other objectives need to be a woman or person of color. & -- and somebody with the requisite skills. i'm sensitive to the immigrant issues. my grandmother was ill literate. she couldn't read or write. but was a smart woman. she could speak four languages. i think it's important. it's important to acknowledge and recognize. but we need to put it in the

context of what are the department needs. thank you. >> president mccarthy: thank you for your comments. is there anybody else? >> there's one more caller. caller 415760, you've been unmuted. >> yes. this is pat. i want to comment about the deputy director's decision. i was on the commission in 1995. was very familiar with the roles when they were being written. the deputy director's position has never been advertised. it was a position selected by the director as part of his staff to blend in to what he needs. so the fact that director o'riordan advertised it was more transparent more than anyone has done. i find it annoying that you got criticized going above and beyond what has ever been done

in the past. and that position needs leadership more than anything else. i have a couple of degrees. i couldn't do that job. you need to have someone who has been in the trades. and can lead the inspectors and have the trust of the director. anything beyond that, i think would get in the way. so i think this has been handled perfectly appropriately, if not above and beyond what has been needed. thank you. >> president mccarthy: is there anymore public comment? >> there's no more callers. >> clerk: thank you. and president mccarthy, could we go back to the item of our acknowledgment for former deputy

director dan malory. >> president mccarthy: yes. deputy director, are you available? >> yes, i am i'm going to locate to the room next door. i'll be right with you. >> president mccarthy: live tv. this is kind of personal for me. dan and i started arne the same

time. and on behalf of the department, i just wanted to congratulate dan malory. he recently retired after more than 20 years of service. dan was a member of [indiscernible] [audio interference] >> i think most of all, he was important in the sense that he had a wealth of [indiscernible]

>> i'd like to wish dan the best in his retirement. and we appreciate his service. dan will be missed by many of us. with that, i'm going to present on behalf of the department. [indiscernible] >> thank you. thank you for your service. thank you. >> president mccarthy: thank you, dan. thank you, pat, for your words there. are you giving the certificate

now? >> clerk: on behalf of the city, congratulations. [indiscernible] >> thank you. >> thank you. it's an honor to work with you. thank you. >> president mccarthy: dan is always a man of many words. you're just always -- your actions always spoke loudly in the department. thank you. commissioners is there anybody who would like to say something and close it out, then? >> thank you. congratulations. >> congratulations, dan, good luck! >> enjoy yourself and thank you for all of your work. >> i plan on doing that. >> president mccarthy: dan, i wish you all the best. i always found you to be a gracious person and helpful.

[please stand by]

>> it'schallenging here, you all know that .[inaudible] ...

>>president mccarthy: thank you dan and good fishing and there's a lot to be talking about, we got our knees replaced so that was our little get-together conversation so good luck, you will be missed andthanks foreverything and after this is over and hope to get together for a beer with you . >>thank you . >>president mccarthy: next item not a secretary . >> next item is regarding the search for aprimary director of the department of building inspection . >>president mccarthy: thank you, i believe we have kate, are you online? >> she is here. >>presidentmccarthy: thank you for coming at such short notice

. i appreciate that why you go through your thing if we have questions for you and we can take it from there, thank you so much. >>kate: good morning president and inspection commission, i kate howard, deputy director of the department of human resources and i'm here to make a brief presentation regarding your role in selecting the next director of the department of building inspection. i talked to youabout the process and offered the hr support to you . i'm going to sharemy slide . all right. so i'm going to talk to you briefly about the role, the

process and some resources we have available. so as you know, the charter gives the commission power to appoint the department head and specifies a view qualification . i've highlighted that in the second bullet that director of building inspections in bold italicsshall be qualified by either technical training or administrative experience in reinforcement of building and other construction codes . i also highlighted for you the minimum qualifications that were included the last time this position was open for recruitment what was in 2013 and you can see it includes aba in one of the following fields.

six years of management experience related to administration of building codes. and then possession of a current certification as a building official so those are the minimum qualifications that were tied to the role the last time the commission conducted the search and you will have an opportunity to with your either with your recruiter or working with dhr to review those and update based on the commissions assessment of what's needed today. so as i mentioned, you can because you have a really the critical role here in identifying evaluating and selecting the next director of buildinginspection , you can work with either and the city's department of human resources to assist you in that search

and or an executiverecruiter to help you manage the process . in both cases we recommend that you work with someone outside of the department of building inspection to ensure candidate confidentiality, to ensure both internal andexternal candidates are not advantaged or disadvantaged in the process . and that you have the opportunity to evaluate a diverse, well-qualified pool of candidates that have external support to identify that . most but not all of our recent department head agreements have been supported by an external recruitment firm but has directly supported several commissions . just to give a little graphic that sort of outlines the process, there are stepsto executive recruitment. i'm going to look at mine on my paper . so the first step is really to

decide whether you wish to work with dhr or whether you wish to have an external firmsupport you . if you want to use an external firm we have a prequalified group of 11 executive recruitment firms that we can request proposals from. they let us know if they're interested in working on this recruitment and what their approach would be. we would then bring those proposals to the commission for your review and selection. and that's where really the only difference. the next steps whether you work with dhr or with an external recruiter is the recruitment support would help you prepare a profile of your ideal candidates. and would think about that along qualifications, about

what is the job description encompass, what are the characteristics of your ideal candidate and that will then guide the recruitment strategy. once that profile is finalized, the requirements can really begin. that will involve posting job publicly, doing proactive outreach to potential candidates who are in similar roles from to see if they may be interested in doing this one. once candidates apply, the recruitment firm or dhr would evaluate those candidates to see which of them meet your minimum qualifications. and then would bring forward that falsely of candidates for your review and at that point the commission would identify

which of the qualified candidates with which to interview.you would then conduct a series of interviews with those candidates and then we would go through a process to do final vetting of the finalists. at that point you could move forward with working with dhr to make an offer to the candidate and set the salary. as i mentioned we have a list of 11 prequalified firms. they've already gone through a competitive rfp process though their available to work with the committee upon request. they're listed on the right-hand side of the screen and the next steps interms of working with one of them would be to , we would request proposals on your behalf and then let you know who's interested. typically we would want you to think about things like a firms

demonstrated experience recruiting for similar types of positions and even in the same industry. how they would engage with you at the commission and other relevant stakeholders, that may need to be consulted about the key attributes that you're looking for in a new director. we want them to present you with theirrecommended approach to conducting the recruitment . and to detail that they understand some of the unique challenges and opportunities associated with this. finally, we want them to elaborate on their approach with respect to bringing forward a diverse candidate pool and their proposed scheduling costs. in my experience, once a commission makes a determination about kind of

starting the process, it's typically 12 to 16 weeks to go through the process as i outlined on this table. with that, i'm happy to answer any questions and i will try to stopsharing . see one thank you kate. i will open it up to my fellow commissioners orquestions to kate if that's possible . i'm sure everybody want, so i don't miss anybody, could we start with commissioner sam moss. >>sam moss: no question that this time. >>president mccarthy: commissioner alexander tut.

>>elysabeth alexander-tut: understand there's an amendment qualification and often a desire qualifications so we will be able to influence and put some things on the desire qualifications which does not meetthe middle qualifications. i see that but can you talk about what that actually means in terms of the actual process ? >>kate howard: thank you for the question commissioner. you are exactly right. minimum qualifications are the baseline, kind of the minimum set of skills andeducation and experience that we would expect someone would have in order to be successful in a job . it's very common and really important that we also identify desirable qualifications such that you as a commission would identify that would make someone exceptionally well-qualified and someone who could really succeed in the

specific environment here in san francisco. that's exactly right, you will go through working either with us or a recruiter process to figure out what are those desirablehe would add . typically a recruiter might bring comparable announcements from other jurisdictions in the region or in the state so that you would have an opportunity to see how othersare marketing these kinds of roles and how they are recruiting for them . >>elysabeth alexander-tut: thank you. >>president mccarthy: commissioner pete please. >> i think the first step like you suggested is deciding whether it's done by dhr for the panel. when will we be provided that list and how do we initiate

that process. is that immediately, isthat tomorrow or in a couple of months ? >>kate howard: thank you for the question and i would be for you and commissionpresident mccarthy about the timeline about when you want to instruct us to move forward from a process point of view . what we need from thecommission is some direction that you are interested in working with one of the recruitment firms . we would then at that point will out and ask them to basically draft a proposalabout how they would conduct this recruitment including time , budget, proposed approach , etc. you don't have to make the decisionabout working with a recruiter or dhr today . it is possible to, we could go out and see who's interested in

working with you and bring that information back to you as well as give you an example of dhr's recent executive recruitment work. >>rachel beto:when we set up another special meeting to talk about this whether it's internal or external ? >>president mccarthy: commissioner beto i'm going to wait to hear the rest of the commission's comments and come back to you for the next one if that's okay, i'll do the next round and get back to you . not a problem. commissioner jacobo please. >> it helped bring a lot of clarity to theprocess which i appreciate and looking forward to next steps . >>president mccarthy: commissioner vice chair tam. >> let's say we want to move

forward with the additional recruiting company and decide we want to work with dhr, we have that option open to us. >>kate howard: that's correct commissioner tam. there's no requirement to engage one of the consulting firms just because we've asked them for information. >> thank you. >>president mccarthy: i believe that everybody area commissioners, where unfeeling i want to see if i have support for this is if we take this information that we got today from kate and process it and comeback next month with a game plan , to include for example commissioner bito'scomments , the way it laid out the way kate has laid it out we can go either with dhr or the executive recruitment team and maybe kate, the next time you

come back maybe you could find out in the recruitment team who would be effective in kind of doing this? last time i did this commissioner finch can relate to this, this was last minute so it was a bit confusing. it would be good to know we had somebody who's solid and interested in doing this with us and i would be interested in somebody who's to know your withworking with dhs , with dhr, yes? >>kate howard: was of them have conducted recruitments for an executive level position within the city. the one okay. and from there then we can talk to where we feel the timeframe is and pull it back in place. i don'tknow what the other

commissioners think about that . iseverybody okay with that ? that's what i like to do so we can take any action on that? >>elysabeth alexander-tut: i think i have to recuse myself, i don't know at onepoint i have to recuse myself from considerations with the contractors, maybe i should say that . >>president mccarthy: you are good right now. that's fair enough.okay, kate onceagain thank you for coming and if it's okay i will talk to you in a week or so . in preparation for the next time, okay? >>kate howard: i'm happy to work withyou and we will be back at the next commission meeting . >>president mccarthy: is there public comment on this item? >> any members for public comment? there don't appearto be any in the queue . >>president mccarthy: okay.

>> our next item is nine item 9 regarding an ordinance where the supervisor number 21015, committee of the building code implements ethicscompliance control and consumer protection provisions for projects, individuals, agentsand instances of significant violations . continued from the january 20, 2021 meeting . >>president mccarthy: thank yo madam secretary . is john back? >> i don't think he will be speaking on this item . >> president mccarthy, i could say a couple words and i will head it off to amy from the supervisor'soffice. this is for everyone's slide .

... okay. thank you president mccarthyand commissioners .a couple words about this before we go and remind folks that this legislation was born of a policy that dbi has had for some years now to track folks to provide extra scrutiny on in theinterest of public safety . so this legislation makes a formal process and i want to thank the commissioners and board of supervisors staff who worked with us on refining this legislation. i really appreciate your engagement and your collaboration .

and in addressing some of the concerns that were raised last month as well as by the department. we will go over this legislation in more detail but i just want to highlight some of the items that are different from last month. one of those items is theirs added from a process standpoint implementing this and that's important because obviously as we are carrying this out we want to make sure that we're going by existing processes and operational needs we appreciate that flexibility. there was some clarification of the types of violations which i think is also helpful from a process standpoint to provide more clarity on that. it's also need to change to specify which departments need to provide an extra review for

the project and that is really the three inspections that will happen and making sure that those are attributed on the departments who really do need tounderstand whatthese conditions are before the permits are issued . finally , they gave us a little more time to train our staff and identify suspicious permit applications which is helpful especially in pandemic times, it gives us a little more time to get everyone up to speed and i will say again ask you to everyone who collaborated on this. and hand it off to amy binder. >>president mccarthy: thank you christine. >>sam moss: >>amy byner: good morning, can you hear me? >>president mccarthy: we can hear you.

>>amy byner: amybinder, thank you so much president mccarthy and commissioners for inviting me back . as we discussed and steve mentioned in the follow-up to the january 20 hearing where you decided to continue the item, we met as a small group led by john murray and several members of this commission and that input went into refining some of the amendments that we intend to introduce. our committee meetings on monday. so i actually did prepare a big powerpoint just take you through i know that i just wanted to get everybody on the same page if that's okay. thank you.

... is that working out? >> yes it is. >>amy beinart: iwill move forward quickly, i know you had a long meeting. just to remind folks , the intent of this is as christine mentioned extra scrutiny on those who have been found to have repeated and significant violations so the problems that we see is that there are some

parties who have serious and repeat violations and that are challenging the ability of an apartment building inspection to operate itself in the permit system and ultimately endangers the public so the solution, we just wanted to take you through these various steps of expanded compliance control using defined criteria and explicit procedures injuring the clear chain of responsibility, ongoing and regular reporting, citizen oversight, that's the role of the local inspection commission and public transparency . the legislation has various components and i'mgoing to go through them one by one . so the internal tracking violation, we identified what those significant violations

are. and there have been refined through the process of getting feedback frommembers of the commission and others . this representation of the existing division that ultimately ends up circumventing notifications for review procedures. structural work or demolition of structural features without or beyond permit. unlicensed work where a license would be required and then substantial noncompliance and those would be tracked internally and then that tracking record would be reviewed internally by dbi staff to see if violations come up within 18 months and that triggers the canvassing for expanded compliance control and protection measures. then there is a public facing

expanded compliance and control list and the process for someone moving from the internal tracking to that public facing expanded compliance control list is inspection services, preparedness determination report including input from the candidates that is your outreach to someone who would be eligible to be on that list to invite them to provide exculpatoryinformation . then the director makes the final determination, dbi then notifies the ones prior to them being on the list as advent of the list, maintains the list on the website so the public can see it and providea quarterly report . on who's on the list and the progress. the protocols once someone or a

project is on the compliance control list is to mandate reporting to an applicable licenseboard or regulatory agency . it requires senior staff review and multi-stationreview. i think they can after approval of the permit , part of that is intended to bring planning back into the process so there's a confirmation that there's a matchup between what planning has approved and whatbuilding inspection , what building permit allows for. notify all parties on application or on these requirements, so it doesn't take anybody's my surprise, heightened sections prior to insurance permits again, connection toplanning and also to ensure that site conditions

are as described in the permit . requiring that a licensed contractor remains on the permit prior to assurance except for in a situation where there's an owner builder option in therequirements . dedicating a senior inspector for inspections and any complaints to ensure a high level of review and accountability and then consultation with the city attorneyabout any additional enforcement actions . we want to make sure that if there is a need for stepped-up action that that is, that that is included. and then there's an ongoing reporting so building inspection commission received quarterly updates, the list wouldremain on the expanded compliance control list for five years . if there was an additional significant violations during that time, it falls on the

tracking list that would actually end the period time that the party would be on expanded compliance control list and then any determinatio really either in either direction would be appealed through building inspections commission . internal , we're going to make sure that staff are provided the adequate training and that expectations are clear for them. and as christine mentioned, you will have administrative time to take care of this because we know you're managing a lot of urgent changes very quickly what we're looking for is written guidance and training for review staff so that they understand the kind of methods that sometimes are used to cloud the intent of a building applications. and to prevent requirements on,

that there are guidelines or staff so that they know it's okay and expected to estimate applications that indicate that potential abuse and then have real sensitivity to the cultural differences of parties are associated with permitting projects. so the amendments as christine mentioned, we did make some changes. the criteria for the significant violations, we spent a lot of time discussing that and that has quite the staff in response to the input we got. the language for the process which is overprescribed is now simplified with the goal of really just emphasizing what are the steps involved and what are the rules of the director and building inspection commission. we revived the criteria to allow for immediate

implementation under to circumvent this idea of tracking for another 18 months would allow some of the parties who are already known to have half past that threshold would be delayed so there is an immediate implementation. clarifies the role of the other stations and departments to review site inspections so we wanted to make sure that that planning in particular is flagged. the requirements to name a licensed contractor for work on the expanded compliance control list added rather than having an agent or permit be approved without having the name already in place of the licensed contractor who would be doing the work. just wanted to make sure it was closed.

extending the date for the internal trading and guidance calling off cultural differences that is it in a nutshell. i would be happy to take questions, we certainly are looking forward to having support of the building inspection commission moving forward. thank you and fellow commissioners, if it's okay i like to go to public comments before we go into our comments, if thatwould work for everybody. with no objection, seeing on. madam secretary we go straight to publiccomment ? class any members of the public would like to speak for public comment ? again, access code is 146 524-4051. please bless áthree to unmute yourself if youwould like to speak .

it looks like there's one caller.>> give them one second. >> pollard, 415-4001, you have to unmute. color 415-4001, you have been unmute it. >> they're not speaking, color,

if you would like to call back again or check yourconnection . there was only one caller, correct? >> that's correct. >> mister mccarthy if you like to go tocommissioners and we will try to get back to public comment . okay. we have another caller. >> 415286, you have to unmute. >>caller: i don't know if you can hear me. >> we can hear you. you can turndown your background noise but we can hear you . >>caller: my name is karen

buckley and, can you hear me okay. >> yes. >>caller: my name is karen buckley and i'm a general contractor for over 35 years here nowin san francisco . i'm familiar with the dbi and support the formalization of the bad actorpolicy . i want to express concerns with regards to the implementation and the expanded compliance control with regards to structural work, i guess i'm thinking from contractor's point of view that if there were issues like an interior door or exterior door was moved or if there was things like if there was a historical buildin , and also, how would it affect

the subcontractors? there would be maybe 15 subcontractors on any of these jobs and it would affect them in any way? that would be another concern and also i would keep in mind that in san francisco there could be many different nationalities working on a project and you do have that , you do have that language barrier i guess and there's misunderstandingssometime so i guess there are a few things i would have . thank you for your time. >>president mccarthy: mister buckley, thank you for your comments. >> we have three more colors, 415995 area.

>>caller: my name is david kane, a structural engineer and i believe there's an existing av 40 policy in place and i'd like to see before additional legislation is introduced and passed that the building inspection commission consider reviewing that policy and in quarterly reports action taken for that policy. then on behalf of the structural engineers association and care of the professional practice committee i like to read a statement that we submitted yesterday. dear commissioners, we have a long history of working with the city of san francisco and would like to help the building inspection commission andboard of supervisors in their efforts with the reference ordinance . we agree with the general intent of the ordinance but the specific wording is intentionally damaging as it implicates a structural

engineer who may have had no knowledge or control over the conditions resulting in a permit violation. when a project is identified as noncompliant inspectors list all involved parties on a publicly accessible database. these parties when publicly identifiedto be falsely implicated regardless of their role in the project . in most construction projects under dbi jurisdiction the structural engineer has no control over the selection of contractor nor the constructio process and any design professionals that design project , delivered the documents to the client and have never further than engaged by the client . in cases like these the structural engineer has no knowledge of the construction in the field and is not in a position to address the structural skills. >> color, if you could wrap up your comments, your time is almost up.

>> what we would like to see is that we support the modification of the ordinance that would limit tothose who willfully act in disregard . thank you. >> thank you. >> color 415297 you have been muted. >> good afternoon commissioners. i like to, my name is love white block and i represent the public policy and action committee of the san francisco aia area we have similar concerns as was expressed by mister king and the design professionals were often not engaged after the permitting process was complete and the construction of a project and both owners, contractors and other design professionals can make decisions in regards to work that we have no responsibility for your input in. our suggestion is that prior to being put onto the code

compliance control list, we were allowed to the opportunity to provideexculpatory evidence that we have a responsibility for any of the violations occurred . we feel strongly it's important that we are able toprovide the evidence at the time of the notice of violation report , evidence, time, memory and its become difficult over time to show that we share no responsibility for the violation. thank you, iappreciate the time to make a comment .>> thank you for making your comments today. >> color at 415850, you have beenunmute it . >> good afternoon commissioners, my name is crystal and i worked as an electrical contractor in san francisco for 16+ years and i'm very familiar with dbi and support the enforcement of a

bad actor policy. i do however have a few concerns as to the new definition and implementation that's being proposed. and in san francisco by the very nature of planning directives, a large portion of construction is in remodeling existing structures. for a large part of these projects existing site conditions are really not fully realize until the demo portion is complete and if items are discovered after demo it will affect how the project policy already exists for projects requiringcontractor to work with building to document these and to amend the department and it again is by nature of the construction , this is a process that is used and even in our electrical part of the process weconstantly come

across conditions that are unsafe , old or simply no longer function as they should have when they were first install and we with the city inspector document these conditions and in some cases if the owner doesn't want to possibly or maybe can't afford a fix, a correctionnotice for notice of violation is filed . and like in a case like this are authority is tied with the strike, nobody's done anything wrong area it's been aprocess of doing the job . i can easily imagine a three-month period where we would come across existing site conditions that were in need of repair and not part of the intended scope of the job so this is everyonefrom the owner to the installer to the design professional , gains another strike. and the department of building inspection in particular the inspection services division has beeninstrumental in keeping a high standard of construction in place in sanfrancisco for

decades . i am in favor of correction. >> if you could wrap up your comments . >> while i'm in favor of tracking bad actors i don't want to see these few one percent factors caused the policy to be implementedthat brings more tothe 99.9 percent then do it the right way every day . thanks commissioners . >>president mccarthy: thanks for your comments. >> color at 41560, you have been unmute it. >> this is pat bustamante again. i have complained for years about the bad actors because the amount of time the building department has to spend with them has diverged their attention from other important things as if you're going to date, you should have a preconstruction inspection. if you're going to do demo you

should time that could have gone to those items that dealt with the bad actors. this may help, but i just worry that this will become another major time sink that's not just the bad actors should have the department going out and working on preconstruction but every job that has excavation should have the building department going out . so i just cautioned that when you post someone's name on a webpage, that will be a significant legal issue. you'll probably beinvolving the city attorney so i just cautioned , we don't want to put in another time sink and we're not dealing with standard issues like undermining buildings that happen way too often. so we should regulate a required amount of resources for this new ordinance, thank you. >> thank you misterbostitch,

are there any more colors? >> three more so on the line. 415929, you have been muted . >> hello. hello, >> we can hear you. >> my name is sean keegan with the residential builders association and i'd like to start by thanking the commission and supervisor and specifically amy for initiating this conversation and working with the stakeholders. i'm calling to support the legislation with the amendments. san francisco has always been an immigrant town andto me and to others, this means we must do more than just complete offering best positions, cleaning, work and hotel . it's very important that the immigrant community integrated into society and currently that means economic opportunity.

construction center offers the highest run economic ladder for those who don't speak english, those who don't have a college degree or those who simply like to work with their hands outside area unfortunately as time has passed , bidding trust has become more and more complicated. most sophisticated and complex firms and many of those land in the lapse of this vulnerable group. compounding the problem is what someone else to earlier is most of this design work occurs without opening up walls and ceilings. this can create many unforeseen circumstances in the field. contractors and dbi will always have to deal with thesenumbers were seen issues . there would be goodcontractors who make mistakes . that's part of the process. our goal was to distinguish those honest mistakes from those who willingly and deliberately and even strategically misrepresent or go beyond the scope of

government with the goal of circumventing the process . and that's the group we really need to focus on. that is that takes time and also to other resources the good actors. so moving forward i would urge the commission to support this but i also urge them to continue to refine the legislation to further distinguish those two very different groups. people who make the honest mistakes versus the people who willingly, deliberately and strategically manipulate the rules, manipulate the codes, manipulatthe plan to avoid the public process . thank you . >>president mccarthy: any other speakers? >> there are still three more. 913, you have been muted.

>> thank you, president mccarthy and commissioners this is ryan patterson and i'm a land-use attorney in san francisco and i want to thank you first before taking action to encourage , to discourage violations. i do want to express concerns especially about due process as the legislation is currently drafted. there's no public hearing . important criteria are undefined. what is an egregious violation? it's unclear as currently written and is also unclear who is subject to the law. a subcontractor whodidn't have anything to do with the violation ? someone coming into remedy violations before and after and what about a company versus just an individual? on the penaltyside, five years is a long time . that seems unfair to me if the violation would not was not the

fault of this person or if it wasinadvertent . the fundamental problem i see is this legislation is drafted designated individuals as untrustworthy to head off future abuses rather than punishing past abuses and i think that there are methods to do that currently, drafts that can and should be expanded. but that might seem a better approach as opposed to something more speculative that forward-lookingrather than an immediate penaltyfor violations . you very much happy to continue engaging you on this . >>president mccarthy: thank you mister brian. >> color at 415244, you have been unmute it. >>caller: good me good evening commissioners, can you hear me?

>> we can hear you. >>caller: my name is leo cassidy. i'm acontractor here in san francisco and however , i support the ordinance but it has too many petty issues that can be brought as violations. and it needs, it still needs some work and i'm reiterating a lot of the comments that have been brought up previously and i do see answer. in the middle of a pandemic right now and we are focused on an ordinance that to me doesn't make any sense. we shouldbe focusing on the backlog in dbi . you know, the four of the five and six year process that's going on. however this will affect a lot of homeowners and there is a lot of owner of work that goes

on and i'm sure that the homeowners when they find out that they find out that they have to date it all it should be good and it's going to cost to construction comments want to add cost too many different things that people don't follow the rules and one of the reasons i do support. but you know, there's so many things that are exempt from this. when you get a building permit from the city and county of san francisco, you have all your utilities such as water, sewer, telephone and cable you have to get an approval through in dbi and they seem to be exempt from this process and i'm wondering why are they exempt from it and i justthink it's a small contractor wants to, is in the beginning of starting out , getting into contracting, the process has gotten so convoluted with so many different things that in the

long run contractors you don't see in the middle of the pandemic many techies going into the contractingbusiness . the contractor's business is mostly immigrants and hard-working people . anyway, again i support the ordinance and i would like to see there be some changes to the ordinance, thank you. >>president mccarthy: thank you mister cassidy. >> there's one more on the line. color415810, you have been muted . >>caller: i'm a general contractor and to give you a bit of perspective, i have my contractors license since 1987 which isnow 35 years . i think the legislation as we're talking about today is too broad and interpretation

from the fact of the point of view i have seen many changes going back to the 89 earthquak . i have worked on all types of construction, youth development and spatial remodeling and still working because that's my life. this morning i decided just to give you an idea of what it's like to do a major remodel on a residential project and the list of professionals i have to hire in the process of getting my project approved . you start with your site surveys and an architect, a structural engineer, shoring engineer, special inspectors, mechanical engineers, title 24 engineer, waterproof construction and that's before we start without subcontractors from excavation and electrical

and plumbing and so on.so you can see that the list of people responsible on anyone project can grow from 20 licensed professionals so i don't understand how this legislation the rift it creates between all these people and who is created in the filing. all those people carry their own liability as i do. now, in my 35 year experience in the construction industry here in san francisco, the biggest issue we run into is the substandard state of the housing that you work on. houses that were built after the 1906 earthquake and when you get yourremodel permit , you don't really know what you're doing until you start to open up the house and you see construction work that you find theirarea . >> if you could wrap-up your comments, sir. >>caller: that's why the system in place at the moment you have

to do memorialize changes you've made during construction and i'm just afraid that some people will get caught up in this violation and get on system of violation that is very hard to get out of. thank you for your time and i hope you make some changes to it. >>president mccarthy: thank you mister line. >> there are no more colors on the line. >> thank you, also acknowledging for the record that the commissioners did receive a letter from miss georgia okay, presidentmccarthy . >> thank you for the input from public comment. amy, i kind of broke down a bunch here. if you want to address any of those ? it would be kind of helpful but

a few questions were thrown ou here . i do know the answers to some ofthem but let's see what you can pull out . >>amy beinart: thanks very much and thank you for those who called in. unfortunately one of the circumstances of going to building inspection commissions are where we go to a legislative committee before the supervisors is that the amendment that we are planning hasn't yet been introduced so they are not in the formal record and so what people are responding to is a version of this that create an amendment so i just wanted to clarify some of thethings that i think will be helpful . one is just the internal tracking system is, it starts with a building inspector issuing a notice of violation

for a very specific list of types of violation that are significant. that's a first step and those are now listed as misrepresentation of existing conditions that result in circumvention of notification or review requirement. structural work or demolition of structural features without or beyond the scope of the building permit. work under permit performed by a party without required license or other substantial noncompliance including but not limited to work beyond the scope of the building permit that result in significant risk to health and safety of building occupants, future occupants, workers or adjacent movers to the point here is the first thing is that it would have to be identified and then take notice of violation would have to be issued and i understand there are situations

where a notice of correction is issued . this is not where the notice of violation. those would be, most significant violations would be tracked internally on a tracking list.one when there are only when there are three significant violations within 18 months and someone on that list the for consideration for the expanded compliance control. so if that occurs and i would expect and hope that that would be infrequent, that's three of these significant violations within 18 months, then dbi reaches out to the candidate to offer an option for providing exculpatorymaterials or information . that, we haven't defined what that is because that will be something that is i think determined by department of building inspection.

and at that point, if that, if the inspector is maintaining that list, he's had exculpatory materials then my recommendation is no, this person is not looking to the expanded compliance control is, that's a recommendation then made to the director and the director makes that final determination so folks are not getting on the public facing list that easily. it goes to either there are multiple steps along the way and multiple places for input from anyone who is, who has been part of a project that has these significant noticesof violations . so i think you areon mute . >> i can't hear you, angus.

>>president mccarthy: didn't mean to intrude but i want to say with regard to the multiple let's say sobs on the job, do you feel that if that answers that question in regards to the past, what you're saying is it has to be egregious or very very major violations done. but you're not necessarily trying to say trying to capture the plumber, the electrical, you just to be on sitethere. i think that was brought up a few times there by two different speakers . is thatcorrect wes and mark . >>amy beinart: >> what we've added is legislation that the inspection services division shall along theviolation , significant violation or significant notice of violation and identify all individuals and other entities associated with the permit and

our project in the permit tracking system or known to be associated with the federal project at the time the notice of violation is issued . and so that is on the track. >>president mccarthy: continue there, do you have comments to maketheir ? >>amy beinart: i think that was the focus of what i was hearing was this concern that there was an overreach and to broad and that is the way. >>president mccarthy: i know mister king there mentioned 1840. that really, his concern there was can you revisit on a yearly basis, staff get with me on that?

>> president mccarthy and commissioners, dd 40 is an administrative bulletin we've had in the san francisco building code for many years now and it basically i'm not putting it verbatim because i'm not looking at right now but basically it allows for referral of these what we call bad actors to the city attorney who can in turn for them to the state licensing sr so it probably speaks to getting us the ability when we identify some of these potential bad actors we can refer them to the city attorney who will in turn contact the state licensing authority for theirprofession and in regards to our professional convention .

>>president mccarthy: so we're hoping wewill be capturing those type of people as well . >>amy beinart: what the ordinance will do is not put people on the internal tracking list but once they've gone through that three in 18 months, the opportunity for exculpatorymaterials , review by the inspection services and person whose monitoring the tracking or recommendation to the director, directors final determination , after that and there are on the expanded control list there would be a report at the appropriate licensing board. >>president mccarthy: on mister patterson's comments on the illegality as he expressed concerns, how do you feel about his comments there?again, i

know you're not there with legality and the enforcement and so on and i think there seems to be a lot of concern from the professional industry being put on one list and so on.do you have anything to add that? >>amy beinart: i prefer this to the deputy attorney. >>patrick o'riordan: okay. >> the ordinance, there are a couple of comments there that mister patterson may the first is in regards to punishment versus perspective . the list is designed to be completelyprospective. once you've triggered the requirements and your subject to compliance control , all these requirements are placed on sfgov tv teams back.

is dbi or other cities that would have totake extra steps to ensure the permit is complied to . requirements for puzzles for its placed on the list under the next review that is required of dbi staff so it is prospective. though violations as we know, notice of violations go out and pass. this is designed to address those who had a history of past acts to make sure dbi ensures there is no future of significant violations that occur. the process that is involved with getting on the list as we said before requires that the inspectors create the tracking file from the dbi director. they would determine whether placement on the list is proper after notifying the candidates and receiving information as to exculpatory evidence for

reasons why they should not be on the list and that determination can have a public hearing if there's an appeal of the director'sdetermination whether to list someone or not list someone, there is a process for an appeal prior to being placed on the list . >> you are on mute. >>president mccarthy: got to get this mute thingunder control. if amy has no more comments i'll go back to the commissioners . okay amy, thank you. i like to open it up there. if i may i like to just go through our normal channels where commissioner moss, do you have any comments >>sam moss: no comments at thi time . >>president mccarthy: commissioner alexander to . >>elysabeth alexander-tut: thank you so much amy and supervisor o'riordan for this thorough presentation. and the receptiveness.

there was a question about building owners. the owner or principal are also up on this list ifthey are , i'm trying to think of the owners who you know, they're responsible for who they hire and if they're constantly trying to hire people who are going around the rules and not having people with each contractor but it might be an owner, someone whoif the owner can end up on this list or is it really just for contractors ? >>amy beinart: an owner could end up on this list. but for a small homeowner the chances of this to repeat what they would get, we're not going after smallholders. >>elysabeth alexander-tut: understood, thank you. >>president mccarthy: commissioner bito please.

>>rachel bito: i think the thing that i probably want to reiterate is from as a design professional is that also from some of the contractors is that they do run across a lot of unforeseen conditions area i don't know if there's any more pencil sharpening on this but i think that's something that i heard quite loudly through some of the calls. the second piece is that the design community, design professionals are not responsible forthe needs and methods of contractors . i guess i just wanted to reiterate that and convey that because that's all i had. >>president mccarthy: thank you commissioner bito, commissioner finch. >> my first question those two state attorney rob castleman. this is a difficult open ended questions but some of the

questions made me think about it and that is sort of the legality and i understand completely yourpoint about this is more of an administrative thing . i think i can tell that's the intent. i could see that being a bit of the subtlety in most people's eyes still think of it as a punishment so that when an engineer or contractor appears on this list regardless of the list, it could be perceived as somehow they are not good professionals . so that could translate into an impingement on their ability to do business. is that legal? does the city have the right to imply that? >> deputy city attorney rob catholic, the city has the ability to enforce and create any proceduresnecessary to

grant permits . to theextent there is a connotation that could be negative in some sense from being placed on this list , that may be any type of infringement on a business or a right or any other concern that the list you may have, that is why there is due process so they can express those concerns so to the extent of parties that do not believe they are, that they should be placed on this list there are two administrative opportunities to provide evidence to the inspector and then director and then to appeal to the building inspection commission if listing was unwarranted and that's solely to protect ability that if there is, if these extra protections on future permits processing i'm not wanted for the candidate, those are the platform to do it. any type of connotation they should not be placed on this list despite having very significantly beeninvolved in these processes in the past again , it's a connotation but it's solely based upon the

necessity of the building inspections to perform extra review on thosepermits to ensure there are no future violations . >> in all likelihood we would be the ultimate arbitrator because if i was on this list two times and for whatever reason, i go to the building inspection commission for my, for the review. that means the building inspection commission because the ultimate decider. >> the commission is the administrativeupheld on these matters but ultimately , most decisions would hopefully be made by the director and they all ultimately made, the final change would be by the director. >> that's the part that makes me uncomfortable to be frank. we would be asked to decide on

the fate of a professional so i think the second question i had is a very reasonable and good point and virginia and amy talked about this in one of our small sessions and i forgot that this idea that after an mfp is issued, there's a moment in time say a week or two to review the mlb and a sort of removed the people that were involved in the fee so they don't go on the list because i understand the listis not published but it is discoverable and it's for the samereason my first question , i am concerned about the optics of people being on the list . and it's just not fair to say a roofing contractor is on the list because they were on from it but the accountable contractor to put a fence

through the proof is the one a fault or something so i just think we need a little more protection for people that haven't done anything wrong . those are my questions, thank you. >>president mccarthy: amy, did you want to answer that weston mark. >>kevin clinch:i think you are on mute . >>amy beinart: i think, i believe that that could be administratively over burdensome to have a process where every time there is a significant, let's be clear, significant violation of the few sites that i described , thatthere would be , that dbi

staff would have to go through a process of notifying and sort of clearing that obligation. i think that there is no ... that the internal tracking list as you said is discoverable. but i would assume there are lots of things that could be discoverable under existing happenstance. if someone were to be on that list, then the indication to provide exculpatory evidence happens at the time when such occurrences would be 18 months and that would mean that the information, i think the onus that was described by the

person who had expressed concern about the timing, this is 18 months and i don't think the records are lost by design professionals within 18 months and i think that is simple exculpatory description of the role in the project. i might be exactly what inspection staff are looking for in order to take that person, prevent that party from being on the extended compliance control list. that makes sense? sorry, i justcircled into the system . >> thank you amy. >>president mccarthy: i do agree with you though that these could be started within a week. 10 days or something like that. but we don't know how many of those there's going to be

anyway. okay. sorry, commissioner jacobo please. >>jon jacobo: i want to thank all the public commenters and even commissioners comments just on the legislation. i think anytime that we're doingsomething that adds an additional layer of bureaucracy always makes everybody nervous .i think sometimes we can get in the way of the things we're trying to achieve but i think on the same tokenif you will , the flipside of it has been unfortunate negative nature of activities that i would argue a small percentage of people are committing that are hurting not just the reputation of the department of building inspector contractors involved but the trust that the public as in us so i think because of that it incumbent on us to have

processes and legislation that strike at the heart of the issues. and i think this is an example of legislation that would very well be thought out because i absolutely hear the concerns of catching people in a net that don't have anything to do with what is actually the malice action that is happening . i just think that's kind of on the societal level with policing practices and when we're cracking down on particular things there's a whole dragnet approach is to get slumped into what and it's got very negativeimplications that come from that but i think internally , this going from the inspector to the chief or whoever that may be getting onto this control tracking list and moving and so forth there's so many different stops within the journey that allows for a person that is caught up in this through no fault of their ownthree times in 18 months . it allows us to weed out those

who they're not trying to target which i believe is the 99.9 percent of people doing this work day today but really focus in on thefolks that are . i have comfort at least and i know it goes to the deputy director and the director and ultimately can be appealed to us kind of the final arbitrary body if you will so i like those kind of aspects of it. andi think that's the language that we've added , i think really is going to be on helpful and ensuring where being intentional with this is to avoid if you will. so i just think i'd ask our subcommittee and commission here to take the time to hear it and i look forward to moving forward. >>president mccarthy: thank you commissioner and vice chairman please. >>jason tam: thank you amy for your presentation and thank you or the commissioners for serving on the subcommittee

today and i think addressing and amending some of the administration. i was curious and commissioner clinched that in my mind a lot of times on the job site contractors follow a bad contractor, a lot of times they utilize the same subcontractor so they bring them through differentsites multiple times and in many different jobs . if there's one bad contractor gets caught up in this internal list that's not published, and drags the subcontractors in multiple times, what is the process there. maybe there clear the first time and do they have to keep going through this process if they are just trying to earn a living and working for this bad contractor on these jobs? >>.

>> rob, if you prefer? >> if you want to it practically i can defer. i wanted to just be clear that if a subcontractor, so subcontractor is being involved or caught in the act of violations they would have the same ability to say they did not have, that they were not responsible orexculpatory information as to why they weren't responsible . and i think the to the extent that the hiring contractor, the master contractor i guess that was put on the list properly could go through extra review so subcontractors can then determine whether it's worth working within the master contractor on future projects for not. but they would have ability.

they would know that the projects they are involved and aresubject to those extra requirements.if they were to continue working with contractor . >> no further questions. >> and amy, thank you. over the years i've worked with a lot of legislation and every now and again one comes my way and this was important and particularly important to the contractors. we did a lot of outreach in talkingto everybody and everybody agreed this needs to be done . no i want to thank you and supervisors for working with u . it's really textbook for me to sit on the commission because there's always a fast track where we put together amazing issues and i just wanted to say it was a pleasure to work on this and kind of have what we have and i know this gives us a little bit more to go through and i kind of want to remind

everybody in the industry that they have opportunities toweigh in there as well as to look through land-use and the other , land-use into theboard of supervisors, is that correct ? okay. so one question i have and i don'tknow if this is a rob kaplan question . are we allowed to attach a motion with this? maybe just read what i was thinking to see as we go through. there's a big difference between a contractor making an honest mistake compared to someone who is deliberately and strategically manipulated the system to avoid public process. please continue torefine this legislation so this only applies to the deserving groups . i would have a motion be attached to that and go up to the land-use and theboard of

supervisors. allowed to make a motion and add to that ? >> the operative motion is the recommendation or disapproval that you can of course include language along those lines. i would say we recommend approval with the continued commitment to as you stated. that is appropriate. it wouldn't be a separate motion, it would just be included as a recommendation o approval or recommendation to provide . >>president mccarthy: if i could recommend to improve with themotion that i sat there, that's okay . >> deputy attorney kaplan, that's correct. you would then have to allow the commissioners to vote on that. >>president mccarthy: so with that, my recommendation is to

move this forward with that language added to the motion if that's okay with my fellow commissioners. >> there is a motion and we needa second . so it's a motion to approve th legislation with the added amendment and is there a second ? is that deputy tam? >> the motion is to recommend approval of the legislation with the proposed amendments as suggested by amy beinart and the recommendation about director mccarthy suggested. >>president mccarthy: do i nee to read that into the record or will sonia be able tocapture that ? >> i will request it from you . we need to do a roll call vote on this motion.

[roll call vote] the motion carried unanimously. thank you. our next iron is item 10, discussion of possible action regarding a reenactment of an emergency ordinance,ordinance 154 zero , board of supervisors file number 210076. temporarily prohibiting construction projects in buildings with any residential rental units that require suspension of water or utility service and residential tenants without providing alternative

sources of water and power to reach an agreement with tenants due to the covid pandemic. >>elysabeth alexander-tut: this is number eight? the special permit director? >> that was thepresentation by dhr. >>elysabeth alexander-tut: there isn't anything else, thank you . okay, so christine, do you know who would bespeaking to this first ? i know we do have someone calling in on the line. >> they would do the presentation, thankyou . >>president mccarthy: lee is muted already. >> lee, you can go ahead and speak. >> good afternoon now commissioners, mister mccarthy.

congratulations on your reappointment . i have a bit of a challenge getting through on webx but i want to thank miss harris and sean and alanfor attempting to get me there on video today . i am here just to talk about a reenactment of an emergency ordinance that supervisors office originally forward in august of last year. emergency ordinances of this body as you probably know expire after 50 days at which point they need to be reenacted if the release is intended to continue so there has been quite a bit of a gap in between the expiration of this emergency ordinance when we initially passed it and it's reenactment. i can that but before i do that i want to walkthrough what this ordinance is about .

the legislationpulled up , the original legislative file number 200763 really lays out what thislegislation does and it's fairly discrete . starting in section 3, subsection a, what this would do is require essentially a projects answer provides alternative water for electricity sources for construction projects that would result in the construction of water or utility service for more than hours in a single day . moving down beyond the provision of that alternative utility supply, subsection b gets into where we think it is appropriate for project sponsors to provide a little bit of advance notice to their tenants in the event of more protracted water or electricity shut off .

>> way to go about these types of impacts. also, just a quick note we made a policy decision in august which we are consistent that this would not apply to affordable housing development and the motion there is that affordable housing units are less likely to be subject to renovation construction work. more likely to maintain safe housing. that was a policy decisionway made in october. then lastly, just how is this going to be enforced and you know john murray can speak to this. we have spoken how this was implemented in august. that is the first time it was implemented. the first time that a tenant

complains or the department receives complaint, this is a complaint-other gented enforcement, the property owner receives a warning. beyond that, after that warning the property owner would be required to e-mail or notify d.b.i. concurrent with any notice to impacted residents of subsequent utility impacts to the tenant. only after that if there are additional violations to result in notice of violation, my understanding this was -- tenants avail themselves in limited second quarters over the first 60 days. john can verify something around 14 complaints received pursuant to the ordinance. very small number. i think, you know, while i

expect this is going to elicit some of the same critics as item 9 on the agenda, which you just heard, i think i would like to frame this and maybe also the previous ordinance as risk of misinterpreting that sponsor's intent both of these are designed to get at bad behavior really on the periphery of what is perceived as normal in the construction industry, and i think that, you know, supervisor peskin would freely admit and has spoken to this on many occasions. this ordinance in particular was a very small few bad actors who were engaged in behavior interrupting utility service for tenants seeking to shelter-in-place on such a repeat basis. it is such a reticent to engage

in honest communication. it was on harassment of tenants. this is designed to give those tenants who were communication broken down with the land lord some foothold to use to get the city's attention on these projects, which are again those projects resulting in prolonged water and utility disruption particularly while tenants are trying to shelter-in-place during the global pandemic. we are, hopefully, going to be out of this phase of existence pretty soon relative to covid-19. a lot of people are trying to shelter-in-place and we are deciding to reup this because we received a number of complaints from tenants still impacted by these types of projects and having trouble to

communicate with the landlord or property owners. that is my presentation. i am here to answer questions. this would be in effect for another 60 days. i think there might be ideas which might want a more permanent ordinance. we are far from that. i am before you to address questions or concerns. thank you, commissioners. >> thank you very much for that. do you want to go to public comment? thank you. >> are there any members for public comment? >> no one is on the line. >> okay. no public comment. commissioner discussion. >> commissioners, please.

>> i think that this legislation is appropriate and necessary, unfortunately, and thank you supervisor for coming to us. are we able to make a motion on this? or is this informational only and we have to wait for next time? >> we can make a motion, yes. >> i would like to make a motion to move this to the board with full recommendation. >> commissioners to weigh in on this? okay. i second commissioner alexander-tut's motion. >> there is a motion and second to approve legislation. roll call vote.

>> president mccarthy. >> yes. >> vice president tam. >> yes. >> commissioner alexander-tut. >> yes. >> commissioner moss. >> yes. >> commissioner bito. >> yes. >> commissioner clinch. >> yes. >> commissioner jacobo. >> yes. >> that motion carries unanimously. next item is item 11. discussion regarding best practices, policies, procedures, and training to ensure efficient and ethical provision of services at d.b.i. >> thank you very much. i have asked if staff to put together what policy procedures we have in place now.

we will do a quick presentation and send it back to the commissioners, thank you. >> good afternoon, deputy director for department of building inspection. i will share my screen. because most of the policies and procedures of city employee obligations are hr related this is a summary of ethical services. i will take a few minutes to go over what we are doing now.

first i would like to start with the strategic plan goal goes to put it in perspective. we talked about this at budget. we review plans and perform inspections. our goal is to deliver high customer service, effective administrative practices and engage and educate customers and stakeholders. basically, these goals all pretty much focus on the same thing right there. focusing on providing efficient and ethical services. inspection services permit. the three actually the last three pretty much focused on the weight of those services that will be performed. how do we get to these goals of doing efficient and ethicalser

00viss? through policy and proceed gurs you are -- procedures and training. i highlighted the procedures in training that are currently underway. current bely all new gees are provided variety of documents. these include behinds books, professional code of conduct to self-code of ethics. anti policy statements, city and county of san francisco discrimination, harassment and retaliation, drug free workplace policies. a host of policies and procedures that are city-wide that are provided to employees when they come in. they have to review. you have to sign something acknowledging that you reviewed and received it. in addition d.b.i. has department specific documents

such as statement of incompatible activities and professional code of conduct. these are in other departments. the reason they are in d.b.i. specific documents. it relates to the activities. it provides guidance to employees what type of activities are compatible with their jobs at d.b.i. professional code of conduct here at d.b.i. that talks about standards of integrity, honesty, consistency, those types of things. in addition all city employees are required to complete online ethics every two years and sunshine ordinance training every year both due april 1. that is outstanding right now. they will send something out to every employee letting them know it is through the link. once the training is completed

there is a certificate to be printed and placed and given to hr as confirmation. additional mandatory staff and manager training bias, harassment prevention, covid safety, a variety of things. we have mandatory trainings and policy and procedures. we also want to do professional development. we participate in special development courses by dhr, itc, the training seminars. what does this mean going forward? going forward in 2021, these are the items we want to focus on to issue our ethical services and the training we will focus on. we will reimplement new employee orientation in 2021. at one time in addition to on

boarding with hr, we would have new employee orientation where several employees would be hired in the quarter with separate training to highlight item on the other sheets we had suspended that. now we will reimplement that in 2021. probably online training but we will reimplement. the director's office is working with the city attorney for the code of professional conduct. the department will develop a training module and all employees will receive training in 2021. these are actually part of the racial equity plan. department will implement new training for all employees and we will implement standard permit technician on boarding and training. basically, to offer efficient and ethical services we have to have policies and procedures in

place and have to make sure the staff is training. that is everything that i have here. >> thank you. is there public comment, then we will go back to our commissioners. >> there is no one online for public comment. >> thank you. >> i want to acknowledge for the record there was a anonymous public comment submitted to all commissioners and you have all received the e-mail. title anatomy of the adjacent neighbor's complaint. i sent that to everyone yesterday. >> commissioner moss. >> no comment at this time. >> commissioner alexander-tut.

>> thank you for the presentation. this is very helpful inning the internal trainings for the staff. in regards to public comment, one question. what are the internal mechanisms for the public to issue a complaint that something was done wrong or what is our complaint process? could someone walk me through that? >> would you mind speaking to that, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners, acting deputy director inspection services. i think i understand the question, commissioner. if someone makes a complaint and we go back to the start.

if someone files the complaint we create a complaint number. it will go to the code enforcement inspector with something about a permit, generally different things that would be sent to the building inspector under code enforcement. they will investigate whatever that ends up issuing notes of violation or whatever action that has to be from the system. if at that point the customer is not happy with the actions of the building inspector they can appeal to the senior or chief inspector or deputy director or to a director. if someone's work is not satisfactory it goes up through the shape of command. am i answering that question? >> yes. is that information publicly

available? is it obvious to the average person? how do i access that chain of command? is that on the website made available to people in the information they receive regarding the complaint if they are not happy? how do they respond? >> very good question. i don't know all of the answers to that. i know what i can do. i can research and get back to you for the next meeting. i do think that in my role here i have been an inspector, senior, acting chief, acting deputy director. i would be contacted by people who want to get -- who do follow up with us. i am not sure it is on the website as much as if someone contacts us they would be referred to that person to the inspector. it would go the supervisor.

that is what we typically do. in regards to your question, is it available on the website how to explain that i would need to research that. we can do a presentation on that for the next meeting. that might be the best way to handle that part of the question. >> thank you so much. i want to thank president mccarthy who reached out to me about this concern. where i am getting at we receive as commissioners a lot of complaints. it is helpful to know where can people go to the department, what can be handled at the lowest level and the commission level? we as individual commissioners are not making the grand decision. this is valid or not valid. we don't have access to that information. what i requested can we have a uniform policy when we receive complaints, how do we as

commission react? where do we go? are there other venues obvious to people to have issues dealt with at the lowest level? to streamline. we only meet once a month. if you have a complaint tomorrow, i hate to have people wait until march 17th to have the conversation. hoping we have a process, a commission to reflect a process within the department so that it is clear, uniform, how we deal with complaints. there can be no accusation that complaints are ignored or people don't know where to go either to the commission or with in the department. that is my hope. i think that would be something that would serve all of us so we can say this is our process, what we do with the information.

thank you. >> can i respond? on our website, it is there. if someone wants the complaint process, we would have that on the website. the thing about complaints, they are challenging. a lot of complaints, unfortunately, we understand san francisco is very difficult with zero lot lines, neighbors in a dispute. some of these complaints can last for years and years. we get where it is very difficult. we see both sides. we are understanding to both sides. people are emotional about properties. there is no problem with that. we do have a proper complaint process from taking that complaint to where it goes to abatement if somebody is not happy with it. the best way to handle it would be to do a presentation with the

code enforcement staff and the director and speaking openly about it. we can give a presentation. that would be helpful to our new commissioners, the public and let everyone understand we are transpair arent and here to be contacted. no problem with someone challenging our actions on the work that we do. >> thank you. also, we were told that there were some concerns. commissioners were briefed on complaints we received at last commission. how can we show the public we were responsive to the complaints we received without triggering the other legal processes? i am hoping we can figure out a way to also let the public know, be able to respond, not just receive but respond. i am sensitive to the legal

constraints of that and would like to figure out if there is a process in place, how we highlight that or if we need a new policy or process to bereresponsive to the public but also with the department. thank you. >> they can look up the complaint track. you can go to the website and track the complaint by address, you can see the actions. i think in one of the cases i was working on on the response, if we looked at both properties we would talking 50 complaints over 10, 12, 15 years. we didn't want to give 50 tracking sheets. you wouldn't want that in your e-mail. we do understand it is a big volume of paper. we are always happy to look into it and respond again to individuals on cases.

>> thank you so much. >> commissioner bito, please. >> i have no comment. >> commissioner clinch. >> nothing. >> commissioner jacobo. >> that was very helpful. thank you. >> vice chair tam. >> no comment at this time. >> i would just closeout. i have a jaded kind of attitude with these complaints. i do know the history of a lot of them. they have very, very common denominators that jump out in the e-mails. if you do a quick search online you will see they have gone through the process. i am talking planning, would have gone through d.b.i., board

of appeals. appealed at the board of appeals. then there would be the staff inter reaction going back and forth to solve and help these projects get off the finish line. some don't want the finish line. i really don't. some want to continue this argument forever in a lot of cases. i would catch criticism for that. i tried in the past to mediate these defenses. it is very, very difficult thing to do. it hurts me most the online comments and in the papers are given about the staff after they do their job diligently and they are finished with the motion they didn't do the job. no was the answer they should have got. i don't want to get off on a tangent. i am all for commissioner

alexander-tut's position to help understand that it has been dealt with and that fair process has been issued. that person has been given due process. she is saying she is cognizant of the fact i have a staff hash hours and hours replaying the same problem year after year. it might go away and come back for a year. i am open to an over statement. that is what we need to get and something to help the staff when they come in front of us and give the green light everything is done for this particular complaint and they were satisfied. we can move to the next business on the commission and they can go on doing their jobs. if there is no more comments, i would like to see -- did i say public comment?

>> yes we called for public comment. >> next item. >> i would like to interject that i will be gone for the record. >> thank you for your time today. >> can i add that i need to drop off at 2:00. i was hoping we would get through the agenda. i want to apprice president mccarthy of that timeline as well. >> we should be done by 2:00. i believe we are good. thank you for letting me know that. >> next item is 12. update regarding d.b.i.'s initiatives to acseller rate permit possessing during the health crisis. >> this is assistant direct or of d.b.i.

i am going to give you an update on the services. i organized the typical presentation we give to focus on the data. i think since some questions have been raised in the last few days about our permitting process and the types of permits we are possessing as well as how we are doing it, i wanted to make sure everyone is clear how we are possessing permits, how many we are possessing and what are the initiatives we are working on? in january d.b.i. issued 4238

permits. 832 were over-the-counter. 2723 were online. those are no plan permits we issue online. building, the electrical, plumbing, reroofing, mechanical permits. these people go online and get permits without coming to the building. we have 48 permits we have issued in january through electronic plan review. together those numbers mean that 65% of the permits we issued last month were electronically. i know that you have read in the press a different story. these are the data. this is the data. i want to call out 78 in house review and 52 addenda. those are in house review that

take longer as well as the 48 permits. those are more complicated projects that have come up in the last few days. again, just to focus on the permit sites. over the counter, majority we are issuing online. we are working currently on adding kitchen and bathroom models to the permits to get online. daily walk in service. every morning monday through friday 7:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. customers come in to apply former mitts an necessary most of the time -- for the permits and walk out 35 to 40 per day. over-the-counter with plans these are what people used to get in a day or two. now they drop off the permit

applications because of restrictions due to covid in the pandemic. 36 appointments per day for people to come in to drop off permit applications. last month we issued 46 three of those. we are tracking 500 per month in the past few months. those are dropped off and right now we are 14 days to look at those and presto another department. then the permit center folks and data analysts i asked to look at how long those are typically at other departments. average is 21 days. a lot of the permits go to the fire department for review, planning department for review, p.u.c., public works. a lot of these permits have to go to other departments as well. not just the dpi plan review.

the time they are spent in other departments under review. for in house review projects. these are more complicated larger projects. this had been toward the end of the year there was starting to be a backup on people trying to submit those projects. we reorganized the staff. we named a new manger who developed a plan for that intake process. i am happy to say that is paying off. staff is working really hard. they are now on the february request, into the month of february everybody who submitted a request to submit one of those projects for intake. over the past three weeks they have quadrupled the number of projects they process every week. the improvements a couple things

we did in the last month again what i was saying in house review projects weresitionnificantly reducing wait time. it is now seven days. target is to process those the same day or the next day. we have made -- we added forms to the website and made instructions more clear to help people get through that process quicker. on the customer service side, we caught up with all e-mails and voicemails and customer service and also from the plan checker perspective they are responding with status inquiries in the business day and implementing a more detailed tracking system to identify issues and respond to them. that is our new chief

administrator has done a lot of great work on this, and he is also online to answer any questions if you have any questions. that is our charts addressing the permitting challenges. we are working on technology improvements for epr. we are committed to expanding the different types of permits that will be accepted into the plan review. we have been working with the folks at digital services to help us with integration and work flow. we are working on adding the kitchen and bath remodels to the permits that people get online and hope to have that timeline so that is at our next meeting. we are currently hiring four more plan checkers to get through especially over the counter with plan projects to be able to get through faster and

get to those faster. we have been offering the plan check staff to get through more permits. we have been partnering with other agencies to help us process permits. recently we launched a prop h process which the planning department is leading. those projects are going through the electronic plan review. it is to streamline small businesses to make improvements. over the next month if we focus on technology again. feedback from the public advisory forum. i think we talked about it before. every three months we host public advisory forum and invite

cusmom tommers to -- customers to give us freed back. we got great suggestions. we held one at the end of january. we are working on implements the feedback we got. again, prop h project ensuring we meet the mandated timeline to get those issues as quickly as possible. >> thank you for that. is there public comment? >> no one is online for public comment. >> commissioner moss, please. >> no comment at this time. >> commissioner alexander-tut, please. >> no comment. thank you so much. >> commissioner bito.

>> i just have a couple of comments to make. one is that i enjoyed the conversation with you and your staff. i sent in an e-mail asking for access to the comments. is that possible so that we hear directly from the public? >> sure. i will also add that and i can verify with john murray. we post an archive of the meetings where you can watch it if you wanted to see the interactions and hear the comments that were made. >> this is john. we do post it. i can send the link. >> then i guess the last -- my

comments are coming more from the perspective that i am trying to learn the process of d.b.i. and to president mccarthy's initial comments when we started the meeting. i think anything i would look at history from the standpoint where d.b.i. came from and where it is heading to. based on that, one of the things i am interested because we are starting. it is february and we are fresh with a new year, what are some of the longer term outlooks for d.b.i.? when i took the tour, i understand that the pandemic is a unique team. being able to look forward what we are going to do after the pandemic or how we transition emerging from the pandemic, something that would be good for

the public to hear and for us to hear so we are not focused on the health crisis. if the vaccine works we will be emerging out of this. what are the long-range planning and goals that d.b.i. has? that is all of my comments. thank you. >> commissioner bito. commissioner clinch, please. >> sorry. commissioner jacobo, please. >> nothing further. >> commissioner tam. >> thank you. no further comments. >> i thank christine for the presentation. commissioner bito's comments i think what i am hearing is, you

know, the long-term range in regard to the department of technology to get back on track there. i think that for me is a big one. the user experience. we had a lot of complaints about the expediter versus not off fording that. that is where i was commenting. how to improve that experience. i do agree. i would look to see realistic set of goals. we talk a lot about it. i would love to see it on a calendar to what we look forward to this year and what is achievable and kind of move towards that direction, particularly the stronger media

presence and things like that. i am sure other commissioners have other goals. commissioner alexander-tut had several points. i will go back with her after the writing. archive our requests to see what we can accomplish this year with realistic goals. i do believe we are moving out of covid. we are in a new office, rebuilding the team. i really feel we are in a little bit more sented waters, i would like to look at that approach. with regard to the permits that you showed me, this is important.

that one, yes. as i look at that and if i remember my numbers pre-covid we are not too far-off where we were. >> i looked that up. in january 2020 we issued approximately 4900 permits. we are not that far-off. considering all of the constraints. >> yes. i think the figures don't lie in my world. this data doesn't lie either. the public perception is one issue. when you look at the data we are not far-off considering where we should be. with the otc with paperwork and plans.

mr. henry brought that up. i could hear frustration in his voice. as a frequent user. his point is he was in and out in two or three days before. now he is saying it is taking forever. he made a comment that i agree with him. if there are comments made you have to go back in, pick up the plans, deal with the comments and put them back. we discussed this before. what are your thoughts on that? anyway that is going to change soon?

>> typically corrections are made the applicant needs to get the corrections and the plans. are you referring to a different means of communication than letting them have the plans and corrections? >> i guess if i understand this if we have plan check comments on otc with plans, the procedure right now is you tell the stakeholder to come back in, give them the drawings back with the comments and it goes back to professionals and reinstatement. i would agree what is the long-term plan on trying to make that process more user friendly? >> the long-term plan is more electronic fact-check and other services for that matter. in terms of the specific case

instituting the check. the plans electronically the comments are transmitted electronically so the applicant will not have to come back city hall to drop off the plans. that is the long-term goal to mittdy gate -- mitigate and to help serve our customers. >> that is what we have right now to work with. would you say that if the use error applicants paid more attention to the drawings they submitted that could reduce this? i am trying to figure out. are you finding there are silly mistakes or incomplete drawings submitted? >> sometimes it could be all over the place.

generally speaking, it is unlikely. generally there are comments from time to time there are approvevals that take place. it is difficult for the applicant. it is a collaborative effort to give them feedback, submit the plans. for them to submit the plans as perfect as possible that reduces our plan check and the time we take to do the plan check. time to get the plans as perfect as possible. i think i see a hardship in terms of doing that. it would help if they do see that. >> no further questions. thank you.

with that are we closing this item? >> yes. we can go to item 13. update on the single room occupancy program regarding covid-19 actions. >> hello, commissioners. chief housing inspector. senior inspector matt look is hard at work on the residential hotel conversion ordinance. letters have to be sent to those sro owners yet to file the annual usage report per chapter 41 of the san francisco administrative code. this is a very time consuming process. takes a lot of resources. we could use help with that. our field inspectors are continuing to enforce the covid

health order in sro bathrooms and kitchens. our inspectors continue to work with some tenants who have mental disabilities which could can be a unique challenge. people without phones or e-mails and issues that aren't part of the housing code sometimes. the senior inspector recently did a training session for parents who had children sros. it is a presentation that i gave for many years of the since we have a new commissioner at the update next month it might be useful to share a few of the slides regarding sro hotels in

san francisco. that is what i plan to do unless there is an objection. are there any questions? >> commissioners? questions? >> i don't see any. thank you. >> is there public comment on this item? i am not seeing any public comment. >> as an aside this is commissioner bito's second official meeting. she is our licensed architect on the commission. welcome to the meeting. >> thank you. >> next item is 14 director's report. 14a update on d.b.i.'s finances. >> good afternoon.

deputy director for department of building inspection. i will share my screen. here is the monthly financial report for january 2021. it is similar to the other reports we have been providing. still projecting to have $3.3 million more than the actual budget in revenues. good news. savings in salaries. that may go down because we are projecting savings. we are looking at $3.3 million in revenue surplus and $3 million in expenditure surplus. the revenues are better than

budget but lower than the same time last year. i am happy to answer any questions. >> thank you. we had our meeting there last week. commissioners any questions to deputy director please? seeing none. next item. >> 14b. update on proportioned or recently enacted state or local legislation. >> good afternoon, commissioners, john murray, legislative affairs. you have already heard about the quality control. we discussed that at length today as well as the shelter-in-place. i missed large chungs of these -- chunks of those i was at budget and finance commission

meaty to discussion the fee waiver for a.d.u.s in existing single family homes. if you were adding an a.d.u. to an existing single family home, this would waive the building permit fees. it did pass the budget and finance committee. it will go to the full board. i want to flag supervisor mandelman's amendment to require conditional use authorizations for residential projects resulting in dwelling units that are over 25 0 square feet -- 2500 square feet. any single dwelling unit over that threshold there is no building code amendment it would affect our customers.

i wanted to flag that to you. that is on the 30-day review clock. with that i am happy to answer any questions. >> next slide. thank you. >> 14c. update on major projects. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is an update on major projects for january over december. major projects are projects that are valuation over $5 million. there was a .03% decrease in total construction in january over december, but there was a .92% increase in total number of dwelling units in january over december. i am available for any questions you may have.

>> thank you. >> 14d update on code enforcement. >> joe duffy acting director inspection services. work is study. response times are good. building inspection housing and code enforcements. building inspections 3736 in january. housing performs 227. complaints 201. they were responded to within 24 to 72 hours under the guidelines. code enforcements we had 70 cases sept to director's hearing. 13 order of abatements. code inspections performed from complaints received 478. that is my update. thank you very much.

>> thank you, mr. duffy. >> thank you. any public comment on item 14a through d? >> no one is online. >> 15. review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of november 18, 2020. >> motion to approve minutes. >> second. >> there is a motion and second. public comment there are no public comments. are all commissioners in favor. >> aye. any opposed? the minutes will be approved. thank you. last item is 16. and adjournment. -- adjournment. >> so moved. >> second. thank you. we are now adjourned. it is 1:54 p.m. >> thank you. .

>> my name is angela wilson and i'm an owner of the market i worked at a butcher for about 10

years and became a butcher you i was a restaurant cook started in sxos and went to uc; isn't that so and opened a cafe we have produce from small farms without small butcher shops hard for small farms to survive we have a been a butcher shop since 1901 in the heights floor and the case are about from 1955 and it is only been a butcher shot not a lot of businesses if san francisco that have only been one thing. >> i'm all for vegetarians if you eat meat eat meat for quality and if we care of we're in a losing battle we need to support butcher shops eat less

we sell the chickens with the head and feet open somebody has to make money when you pay $25 for a chicken i guarantee if you go to save way half of the chicken goes in the enlarge but we started affordable housing depends on it occurred to us this is a male field people said good job even for a girl the interesting thing it is a women's field in most of world just here in united states it is that pay a man's job i'm an encountered woman and raise a son and teach i am who respect woman i consider all women's who work here to be impoverished and strong in san francisco labor is high our cost of good ideas we

seal the best good ideas the profit margin that low but everything that is a laboring and that's a challenge in the town so many people chasing money and not i can guarantee everybody this is their passion. >> i'm the - i've been cooking mile whole life this is a really, really strong presence of women heading up kitchens in the bay area it is really why i moved out here i think that we are really strong in the destroy and really off the pages kind of thing i feel like women befrp helps us to get back up i'm definitely the only female here i fell in love i love setting up and love knowing were

any food comes from i do the lamb and that's how i got here today something special to have a female here a male dominated field so i think that it is very special to have women and especially like it is going at it you know i'm a tiny girl but makes me feel good for sure. >> the sad thing the building is sold i'm renegotiating my lease the neighborhood wants us to be here with that said, this is a very difficult business it is a constant struggle to maintain freshness and deal with what we have to everyday it is a very high labor of

business but something i'm proud of if you want to get a job at affordable housing done nasal you need a good attitude and the jobs on the bottom you take care of all the produce and the fish and computer ferry terminal and work your way up employing people with a passion for this

>> public comment is available on each item on the agenda.

you will be allowed three minutes to speak. comments are available by calling 415-655-0001 access code (146)465-4190. pound and pound again. you will hear the discussions but you will be in his senning mode only. when your item comes up dial star 3. call from quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turndown television or radio. you may submit public comment by e-mail. it will be forwarded to the committee and included as part of the official file. this meeting is recorded and will be available at sfgovtv.

org. item 1. roll call. andrews,. >> here. >> de antonio. >> here. >> fried back. >> here. >> haines. >> here. >> ledbetter. >> here. >> miller. >> here, nagendra. >> here. >> chair williams is absent. reggio. >> here. >> we can go to the public comment on any matters within the committee jurisdiction.

please wait until you are unmuted to comment. you have three minutes. i am checking the attendee list now. there are no public comments on this item. >> item 3. approval of the minutes. anybody want to make a motion? >> i move to approve the minutes.

>> second. >> public comment on the minutes? >> public comment and i will take the roll. members of the public to comment on this item call 415-655-0001 access code 14645465. sorry. (164)465-4190. then pound pound. if you haven't done so dial star 3 to line up to speak. a system prompt will indicate you raised your hand. wait until you are unmuted to begin your comments. you have three minutes. >> checking the list now. i don't see any hands raised. i will call roll. >> andrews.

>> here. >> de antonio. >> here. >> frieden back. >> here. >> haynes. >> here. >> leadbetter. >> yes. >> miller. >> yes. >> nagendra. >> yes. >> reggio. >> yes. >> chair williams is absent for the vote. >> we have two presenters. emily and cohen and ann romero. >> we are excited to have you here today. >> chair, i had asked chair williams and didn't know that she would not be here to make a

few introductory remarks. >> please. >> i am speaking as the housing inventory and pipeline liaison. had a brief connection with emily and ann in this regard. i appreciate there responsiveness and willingness to speak in short order. i guess what i would like a few introductory remarks. one is recognition as committee we are very much anticipating and committed to bringing on additional housing inventory. prop c targeted 4,000 units for the next several years. the mayor's own plan homeless

recovery is assertive in that regard as well. i think in her state of the city recently she spoke to 1500 units over the next couple years. at least 1500 units. there is some urgency to the issue. in conversations with several committee members and community members in addition to urgency on the issue, there is opportunity. i think the urgency comes from the fact that we know or expect as covid proceeds with some resolution that the sip hotels will in time go away within this year likely. we have to have good options to send people to. i think no one in the city departments or certainly not ourselves or anyone in the community wants to see people

going back to the street. we have opportunities because of the real estate market right now. it is different than it was as all of you know a couple years ago, and i think it is important as we plan with cynthia's leadership on our own investment plan which we anticipate completing in march. we would like to thank the departments as well in terms of how and when to move on opportunities there. the urgency is reinforced by the fact that we have a new infusion of fema funding in the city which creates options. we have the likelihood of home key funding coming in the summer, which creates other opportunities. we have a new administration in

washington and new leadership, all put us in a different place than we were several months ago. as we develop the plan we want to be able to have a sense of how prop c funds can leverage more funds in the community. my outreach, brief as it was to the department, was to ask that they today brief us on the status of their own thinking to ward acquisitions and rehab and operations in the future, but maybe with the mind particularly toward what plans if any there are regarding housing or hotel-based or apartment-based housing? are we looking at possibility of acquisitions? what community partners are engaged in that with experience in having the san francisco housing accelerator fund serving

as a partner with us. i asked a few days ago to present a full plan which was a bit short sighted. it may beings more sense to come back in march. i perch peer -- very much appreciate emily and ann are willing to brief us on the plans where activities are right now and whether or not they would be in a position to come back to us in march with a plan. with that intro, back to you, chair. >> thank you so much. that was helpful going into this. i want be to move it to ann or emily to present for us. thank you. >> thank you, chair. i am emily cohen with the san francisco department of homelessness and supportive

housing. it is nice to see so many of you and talk to many of you. thank you for the opportunity to talk about acquisition. ann in the mayor's office of housing and community development is also on the line. i will defer to her on the focused items that did want to comment and talk with everyone. we will be back in march with a more detailed presentation. i wanted to start the conversation with the our city our home committee. we share the goal of wanting to increase investment in permanent housing wanting to take advantage of every opportunity to acquire to enter into good deals for supportive housing. we don't want to be where people off-load bad deals to us. we want to pursue really good -- the best opportunities as possible for the future tenants living there as well as for the

city and non profit partners running the building. we definitely share this goal. we know that we need to have a long term strategy on acquisition and sometimes as quickly as possible doesn't get the best deals. we want to take advantage what is there. what we have done in partnership with real estate, mayor's office of housing and community development. we issued request for information in july and december to assess the level of interest in of property owners to existing hotels, apartment buildings interested in telling to the city. obviously there are preferences around ownership that may beings a lot of sense. we are in the process of reviewing submissions to the

rfi. we have laid outcry tearia we are -- out the criteria we are most interested in members of the committee would agree with are critical to ensuring that the buildings are successful from an economic perspective in terms of scale and location and amenities and trying to determine what is out there that meets the needs of those exiting homelessness. what i am talking about ada accessibility, elevators, diversity of location, looking at buildings with private bathrooms, kitchenettes, shared bathrooms, kitchen facilities, a place to do community rooms, staff offices, because all of that will derm how good deal any of these buildings is.

we could have a great deal upon first offer but realizing if it needs significant upgrades, if we need to build out staff offices, community space. all of those things which we often need to do to add to the challenge of the deal. all of that is to say those are the indicators that we use when assessing buildings. we are in the process of vetting a number of buildings that have been submitted through this rfi process and really hope and suspect we will uncover some real potential buildings for acquisition through there. all of the goal to acquire and bring more housing is very much aligned with the mayor's homeless recovery plan of acquiring or building 1500 new

units of permanent supportive housing, ex planning placements. that is on top of the pipeline of permanent supportive housing and of course increasing the speed of placement to vacated units as well as the goals related on the shelter and prevention side as you focus on housing want to recognize the role that acquisition will play in helping achieve that 1500 goal. as of february this month we have already acquired 412 units towards our goal. which is 1,000 units and then another 500 in the next fiscal year. this includes project based housing, much of which we have worked collaboratively with this community to fund and bring online. we have learned and brought on

some units through acquisition, two buildings through project home key. we have learned quite a bit about this work through that processes specially that the buildings not traditionally not designed to be housing require a lot of due diligence with upgrades needed, thinking about price. it is not the same as telling a hotel -- selling a hotel to a future hotel operator who is basing the price on what they can bring in from tourists. we are learning from what our partners in real estate are telling us. i am looking through my notes. we do suspect to have additional home key funding next year -- we

hope to have next year. we hope to use that funding in partnership with prop c funding to develop a pine line for ac-- pipeline. we hope to come back next month with a timeline. we are hopeful the governor's proposed funding in the state budget will be maintained if not increased through the state budget process for acquisition. as ken said in opening remarks, we are developing and are in the process every housing people from the sip hotels into the flex pool and the options we have for them. we know that we will need to continue to grow the stock in order to achieve our goal.

for the sip housing and housing vulnerable people outside of that sip system. i did want to -- this is outside my lane, but i did want to share some of the things i learned from our colleagues at real estate, and i mentioned earlier. city is not sitting on perfect offer ons. there is some concern we are not moving. we have not received one offer ready to go. we are in the process of vetting interests to begin to work with property owners to put together a deal. there is no ready to go buildings that we are sitting on. i think there is also a sense that interest rates are incredibly low, there is a sense that property prices are really low. we are hearing from our

colleague this is real estate that is not necessarily the case. we are balancing the ongoing financial challenges and financial with the need to acquire and expand. more from our real estate partners next month when we come together to bring in perspectives as well. i will stop there and turn it over to ann from ocd. happy to have the conversation. i would love to hear from the committee your particular priorities, especially when it comes to the criteria for vetting buildings. we want to rely on your expert tease as well as getting your input into that. >> thank you so much, emily. i want to really quick see if there are questions. i wanted to give opportunities for questions.

>> thank you, chair. these questions are also to help prepare for being responsible for questions for the next meeting. we have 412 units abchoired. i was curious if you could speak to the proposal of the breakdown where these units are and thousand they address the needs of the community-based off simple demographics if it supports the single population, couples, families, that type of space available in those projects. i was thankful you mentioned

that you are hopeful to hear from us. if you could present what you have in terms of what you discuss so that we can see what you talked about so far, that will help us between this meeting and the next meeting to come up with thoughts how we might add to that. i believe that would be handy. i think you are talking about buildings that you have already sort every moved from the list. if you could propose a master list of all buildings that are potentially available in the city for being accepted and not accepted. it would be nice to see a report out and to the effect of the types of buildings that we are hoping to bring into these programs in comparison between once that we feel are ready to go sort of built in apartment time format or versus the

buildings that we know they need to rehab. there are a lot of buildings not available to the population because they are not up to speck versus those that need rebuilt. those three categories would help us to understand better what is done thus far. >> through the chair, member haynes, yes, i am happy to bring that information to our presentation in march. a few things to answer for you now. in terms of acquisition, we have acquired two projects with state funding. the granada and dehave hotel -- diva hotels from the state and with local match. resources are both for adults experiencing homelessness. we do -- the majority of the pipeline units online through the pipeline as well as turnover

units, much are focused on single adults. we do have family buildings in the pipeline, traditional in the pipeline as well. in terms of the criteria, we look at size of building, we know that buildings under 50 units don't meet the economies of scale to make them financially as viable. we know the buildings over 250 to 300 units can be challenging to manage afternoon challenging for guests. we try to hit 100, 150, 200 units per knowledge. exceptions are always there. we know they are often made. we also look into ada accessibility and amenities. a lot of building owners report having an elevator. it needs inspected to make sure

it can hold a wheelchair. we do have buildings that aren't accessible or don't have elevator but we know it is preferable that we acquire buildings that do. we look at geography. we don't want to concentrate all housing in one neighborhood. many of the opportunities -- not a ton of diversity among the buildings we are looking at. we also i think a lot of energy is in terms of buying some of the sip hotels. not all hotels are a deal for housing. we want to look at buildings in a broad sense not just currently functioning as shelter-in-place hotels. i have been taking notes on your questions. i will try to include as many answers in my march presentation as possible.

>> thank you. next member nagendra had a question. >> thank you for your presentation. it is very helpful. it this is question at this point or for you in particular. i wanted to ask in terms of criteria for the good deals that may being sense. how should we as committee or the agencies think about the administrative and operating costs. i know that you don't have to have all of that settled when you are kind of trying to figure out the right deal. that is an important kind of thing to get people to operate and do administrative and subsidy costs. is that in any part of the criteria to look at units and costs and things like that? >> that is certainly part of the criteria to develop the goal of target number of units. as we look at each building,

that comes in as we look at each building. this building has some deferred maintenance, what do we need on the capital side? the ongoing operating subsidies, service costs. that is all factored into it and varies depending on the size of the building, scale of the project, par get pop -- target population. part of the thinking in terms of budgeting for the program on an ongoing basis and not necessarily considered at the same time as the capital. if it is a rehab that is part of that assessment as well. >> it sounds like if there is a capital cost we could look at per unit cost in the way you are describing including these things. >> yes. >> thank you.

>> ongoing. especially one-time money from the state is focused on acquisition. the city needs to be committed and able to fund. i am not telling you anything you don't know. fund the ongoing subsidy and services. there is less interest from other sources right now. >> thank you. member fr i.e.d. e nba ch. >> i know you invited input. most of the input around the immediate needs and the sip hotel staff was wanting a minimum of in suite bathrooms, elevators is important to look at, but also kitchenette.

if not kitchen net having the room size for space like that. in my conversations with accelerators it sounded like there was plenty of solid options that met that. that is studio apartments which are a deal. two questions. are you looking at newly constructed buildings potentially on the market that would have more family sized units for folks to move into? i was told there was some of those as possibilities. it seems like we have a huge opportunity with acquisition funds not just at money from the federal government but the fema money that came in up to

$100 million reimbursement and other things. my second question is are you looking at trying to secure project section 8 for operating? >> through the chair, yes. we are looking at buildings submitted to rfi. if buildings submitted to rfi are family-sized units, we will look at those. i have not seen that level of detail from the rfi responses. i know our housing team is doing due diligence. i will find out if there are family sized units and new buildings in there. from what i have heard and seen the focus has been on smaller unit size primarily for the

population of unaccompanied adults. we know we have some newly developed units in the pipeline. i believe ann can correct me if i am wrong that targeted more for families. on the second item let me circle back with our team on that and i will report back. >> thank you. >> member haynes. >> more questions.

>> how are you engaging potential property owners to make them aware of the opportunity to come into this process and how we as the commission that wants to be future support promoting these opportunities? these are opportunities that come before the committee. >> the rfi was issued originally over the summer then again in december. both for property owners interested in following and master leasing. we have a strong response. these rf i's requests for information are open. it remains open and if property

owners come to you, to the committee we request they submit a response to the rfi to request the data in a coordinated way. can share back more of what we learn as we analyze the submissions. we are doing due diligence with the properties that look the strongest, possible options for us, and we will continue to do that work. wants to identify projects that when opportunities become available we are able to move forward and that we have done the due diligence in advance. >> member reggio, for time's sake then we will move on. >> actually maybe ann's comments first then circle back if that

is okay. >> of course, yes. >> good morning, everyone. i am ann row marrow senior project manager at mayor's office of housing. thank you for inviting our remarks. i want to preface that we look forward to a fuller presentation in march of pipeline and sources and working with hsh. in general, our role has been to assist hsh and work in partnership on the two home key projects. we have been vetting construction scope and costs together with hsh, underwriting the operating budget, looking at the best practices, relocation, could individual protocols based experience we have in the portfolio development. we support acquisition as

valuable real estate strategy, especially with heavy leveraging provided by home key. we strongly encourage the city to look at home key projects for the future rounds because it is important to leverage funds that we can. we have primarily new construction. we have a big supportive housing pipeline. currently 1450 units under construction or predevelopment. in this new construction portfolio we collaborate with hsh on the targeting. around 60% for adults. we have other targeting to wards families, seniors, and veterans. we would be happy to present in march to look at what these projects are.

our resources are limited. some funding sources are only bringing new construction. we have a path for debt product to provide flexible under writing and terms. we have some sources to go to that. however, we do have a robust permanent supportive housing and supportive housing pipeline currently utilizing much of our funding. we look forward to working together with this committee and with hsh in expanding permanent supportive housing and it is an important strategy to bring on units the quickest as well as looking at these projects that are going to come on line now through the next five years. that is a very brief summary of how we collaborate with hsh and look forward to a fuller

presentation in march. i am happy to answer any questions you might have. >> thank you, ann. we are looking forward to more details in march. member reggio. >> one question is the question that is a cooperating role with hsh. where is the leadership role? is that for the acquisition of mu properties with ocd or hsh? that is a question to either of you. let me -- so you don't need to come back to me. i have a question given the experience with home key and the role that the housing accelerator fund played in there. what is their role currently? are they involved? are you bringing them in? how might they accelerate the

efforts that we have right now that potentially you would have to further acquisitions? i am particularly cognizant of the likelihood of home key funding coming. i understood a few days ago as soon as the end of june or even july in a recognizing you certainly do in the departments in some of the committee members you can't on a dime turn and have site control and move on putting together a good deal unless you have something very strong in the plans. my desire and my suggestion to the committee that we have a plan had march and know that we are by that time or close to that time prepared to establish local site control and get idea of what you would need or

recommend in prop c funding leveraged to that fact. maybe one is a statement as to timing. the other is a question as to roles. if one of you could speak to that. >> i am happy to respond. emily, do you want to respond? >> in terms of roles, it is a collaborative effort between the real estate department and the department of homelessness and supportive housing. hsh is not the real estate expert. we work with the department of real estate and ocd on the financing. we will -- our role is to develop the criteria for meeting for what is needed for the sites to meet the needs of the population we are trying to serve. we want to work with you guys to

strategically invest in services and programs. we are the lead applican't applying for state funding and work with city providers to acquire, operate and refer tenants to supportive housing and ocd construction and scope including ada, seismic upgrades, health and safety, monitoring progress and quality for new construction. under writing, operating budgets are things that ocd does and i will let ann speak to that. >> i would totally agree with that, and for the acquisition we are working in a supportive role with hsh. given the under writing construction we operate together

with hsh the local operating subsidy program. that question of the operating budget coming up with 15 year contract to provide operating subsidies, hsh provides service contract. so it is a partnership. i would say we are in a supportive role to hsh and these acquisition rehabs. then in regards to the san francisco housing accelerator fund, the two home key projects underway have been a critical partner. because of their expertise and capital they can provide quickly as you all know given the city processes and needs for approval or going to the board of supervisors budgeting, we cannot be as quickly responsive as the housing accelerator fund. they have been a critical partner in these initiatives as well.

>> follow-up on that. do you anticipate calling them in on the current effort toward planning for acquisitions particularly for relows of key funding -- release from key funding a few months from now? >> i would think that they could be a great resource. i don't know the specific plans for the upcoming home key. emily can you speak to that? >> they are working with the housing accelerator fund. we need to drive the process through rfi. having the accelerator fund go out to search for deals is not necessarily the best use of their time and resources. we want to drive that process to the rfi and utilize expertise in partnership to get the deal done.

>> member haines, did you have a question. >> i am not 100% certain it applies to categories we are talking about now. i want to start out with there is one program organized by the san francisco lgbt center. before that came into operation for bayview coalition had a similar program. i am wondering if these two in this commission can think about talking about how in terms of supporting these programs with these fundings. these programs were working to identify those who have room in their homes they can make

available for reaching out to the homeless population. the lbgt center was focusing on the homeless community there in terms of identifying the people who own homes and have rooms for rent and who were prepared and catchable to allowing people to make use of that space to come out of being homelessness. i am wondering between our commission and the discussions. [indiscernable] if there are future economic support for those programs. i think about it because we are preparing to step down with sip hotels and working to build housing, this could be the intermediary space for access to

housing shelter while we work to build more housing and shelter. i want to throw that out for people to think about. >> i did have one question for ann, maybe you won't have the answer today, maybe this is for march. how is covid-19 affecting the pipeline? also, the affordable housing fund? i am assuming this is assumption and correct me if i am wrong, when developers choose not to pay for the affordable housing those are used for the affordable housing pipeline you were talking about. are you envisioning any changes to the pipeline or like in the future a slowdown in the

pipeline because of covid-19? is this something that as a committee we should be aware of? >> those are really relevant questions that we are grappling with right now. in regards to the delays to affordable housing production from covid, it did cause some delays at the outset. there wasn't clarity at the very beginning what does shelter-in-place mean? what are the safety protocols? it was clarified affordable housing was a critical activity and that it could go on and the general contractors and consultants had to immediately put in place safety protocols from the beginning there were slowdowns. there have been a few limited outbreaks that had to be addressed. in general, it is very impressive that the affordable housing production was

prioritized and the production continued. that was a top goal to make sure there wasn't a slowdown, however, it may beings everything much more complicated especially if there is rehabilitation for relocation, service provisions or community meetings with developers that have had to switch to community meetings online to make sure everybody has access, translators. it has been challenging, but people have really stepped up to those tasks. i have been very impressed by that. there will continue to be challenges but everything is moving forward. in regards to the affordable housing fund and the impact of a slowdown in construction, that will definitely have an impact on our budget. that would be important as part of the presentation in march because we have all affordable

housing projects including permanent supportive housing that needs commitments. as the source in the currently and in the future dwindles with less inclusionary housing fees, we have to make it up with other sources to make sure we have that funding available when they have secured all the other financing and are ready to start construction so there is not a slowdown. i don't work at that level with our budget. i know there is an impact that we could include in our presentation and overview of those challenges. >> i want to go to member leadbetter. >> good morning. it is good to hear from you. i am reflecting on a couple things. one is that with the last

allocation of funds, there was a tremendous amount of money invested in housing and moving in that direction. as we talk about the pipeline and what it looked like, i would like to figure out a priority of language. the acquisition goals are being achieved by flexible. i don't think that was intended. i would love to see the context of the overall housing portfolio and also concerned it might be out of the scope of prop c. what we are looking at especially as we invest in scatter sites which is going to be high-quality housing for

people and providing more choice, we will soon continue in the portfolio. thousands of people in substandard conditions that aren't funded adequately to provide quality services. as we talk about operating budgets and moving forward, even if we don't use prop c funds to address this issue, it is critical to keep the values of acquisition moving forward in this conversation. it is not just investing in communities and ownership. it is community-based organizations in the neighborhoods. i think that is unfortunately not necessarily the acquisition approach that we have had in the

homeless world of historically we have had to provide between supportive housing and affordable. supportive is what is necessary. we have a moment to say what does community-based development look like and how do we build on this amazing work san francisco has done for years and years of building strong neighborhood institutions? a little bit of soapbox. i feel strongly there is a lot of opportunity with acquisition that we need to do to be part of this especially to build in the neighborhoods and whatever way the community can support that.

ann, is there any analysis for supporting the portfolio and the help of the existing portfolio of tsh? i know year-over-year in the structural deficit. >> yes, there is and we know that many more resources are needed for that. traditionally in the past we would put out everyone to three years an existing nonprofit notice of funding availability that was a funding source for existing properties to be age to come in and -- to be able to come in to get rehab funds. with the decline of hud funding and other funds to go that that use that is under provided over the last many years. our asset management team is looking at properties that have

big needs and are looking at different ways to recapitalize these properties and traditionally we have tried to look at any properties that have expiring restrictions, maybe losing section 8 or anything at risk for not maintaining themselves is affordable housing and targeting those for investment. there really is a big need, but we could include in the presentation some of the work the asset management department is doing to try to henry capitalize some of the existing projects. >> thank you. >> one more question. this might be too big of a philosophical statement, i don't know, too big of a question. given the current complex of the housing market and funding

sources a perspective on the value at this point? we will work that out together? >> the i don't think i can articulate ocd perspective. maybe we could do that in the march presentation. we see ourselves in collaborative role with hsh. there are great advantages as there always has been. bringing this online as quickly as possible. to the extent those units can be rehabbed to make them high-quality units that is great value. there are other drawbacks as we know. you know, if we came up with a perspective it would be a partner with hsh and the city to articulate what those are and what the trade-offs are.

>> i just want to respond to what you said at the beginning of your remarks. i did not mean to imply that acquisition was or that bringing on units as part of flexible housing pool is part of our strategy. it is to achieve the overall housing goal. the they are two distinct bath pathways. i did not mean to give that impression we are counting flex pool towards acquisition. >> to clarify that. >> apologies. >> i say also that i think in the sort of accounting how we are doing on the mayor's homelessness recovery plan, there is a little meddling where

the numbers are coming from. to really no, we are achieving these goals a little bit of clarity around where those achievements are coming from will help us all get to those goals. >> i think as we use the same language in the community it is confused where these are coming from. whatever we can do to help amplify and a achievement system. >> thank you so much. >> we have a few other items. want to move on to member

frieden back. it seems like there is the acquisition piece, hsh operating and services. there is a sense in the community that is happening afternoon concern around that given hsh being, you know, i think overwhelmed with so much on their plate. i just want to see if my sense of what is going on is correct or not? >> could you clarify your question? >> the change with the sip hotels where hsh is doing more acquisition. it was always you doing the construction and now the operating. now hsh has an acquisition team

of some kind. >> i don't think there is a shift. hsh has the rfi process. we are working in a support role with them and in main area we have been able to do that to date is working closely with them on the two home key projects. it is in a support role. i don't think that is a change from before. >> thank you. >> thank you, emily and ann. we will follow up with some different requests. i want to move to the next item. actually we have to get public comment on this item. if you could stick around for public comment. >> members of the public call 415-655-0001 access code

(146)465-4190. pound pound. if you haven't done so, dial star 3 to speak. a system prompt will indicate you raised your hands. wait until you are unmuted to begin your comment. you have three minutes. we have two public comments. i will unmute the first caller. >> this is community forward. thank you for your presentation. ditto the comments already made. i am calling specifically wanting to advocate for specific

population when you look at possible housing sites. community forward operates a woman's place drop in center on 13th street. a lot of you in this room have been supporters of our work over the last several decades and are very aware that for better or worse the last few decades the drop in has been home to thousands of women who sleep there on plastic chairs every night. many of them have been offered housing, many of you in this room worked on helping them get housing. they are unwilling to accept one size fits all housing. we are in a unique moment because of covid many of the women we work with have accepted the hotels and what we really don't want to happen is that

shelter-in-place lifts and they go back to plastic chairs. it is not a dignified way to live. i guess we want to advocate for as you mentioned veterans housing, different populations to work with. i want to advocate for thinking about women specifically and our dream at community forward is to be part of that building a semi to permanent supportive housing site dedicated to women and that is inclusive of anyone who identifies as a woman. i would like to you remember the committee to consider those immediate needs, consider working with us. we have a 40 year track record working with women and we welcome any ideas for collaboration, connection to housing. the specific piggyback few

comments section 8 project based is something we are really interested in where it is true apartments. also just curious the committee has considered any of the tech companies who may vacate different buildings they formerly had been working out of? thank you for your presentation. >> thank you community forward. i will take the next caller. hello, caller. you have three minutes.

>> i was listening to you all. i have been an advocate for five years. francisco de costa. what i see that is not addressed is when we look at housing in san francisco, we must stay away from housing that is going to be built on contaminated land. in the southeast sector there are plans and they talk about building a so-called affordable housing. that is very contaminated land, and the uranium at hunters point

but even candlestick point is very contaminated. with covid-19 we have millions of square footage vacant. it will be vacant for the next eight years. i say that because you need to have some sense of what i call needs assessment. i ran the presidio of san francisco 650 buildings, hows of housing units so i know something about property management. this discussion that you have, you need to do some reorientation or discussions

about contamination of the land. i say that more because in our discussion paramount should be quality of life issues. thank you very much. >> thank you. hello, caller. >> hi. good morning. i would like to know if funding is going to wards those living in sros can exit the sro to

section 8 housing and allow the space for those coming into operating their first home or first space. why is the housing ladder so backed up for the last four years? there is no section 8 housing. those moving out should be move out of sros to the housing ladder and allow these sros with community living to get the agency back, personal agency and start life in a normal way. i don't understand why that back up is. i hope we could do funding to promote section 8 movement. thank you for your time. >> thank you. i do not see any public comment.

>> thank you for all of the public comments today. we love the public comment. we encourage more people to come and participate. we will move to the next item which is discussion and possible action by the committee on the new fema guidelines related to shelter-in-place and hotel reimbursement and impacts on ocoh funding for sip hotel costs. ben rosenfeld will present. >> it is hard to hear you. please turn up your volume. >> i will provide a brief update on good news which is a work in

progress. as you are probably aware, we received notification several weeks ago first from the president then followed by fema they are revising rules for category b funding, the states and local governments receive related to emergency response cost. b encompasses a wide array of covid response, feeding, hygiene, surge costs noncongregate housing. we are awaiting detailed guidance from fema. what we know is this. from the general announcement that they are shifting from 75% reimbursement for those category

b to 100% reimbursement, expanding basically the programs that we are receiving 75% reimbursement for since the beginning of the emergency are sifting to 100%. that change will be retroactive to the beginning of the emergency, we believe. that is back to january of 2020. fema has also announced they intend to leave that rate in place through this coming september. it doesn't change anything about the eligibility at this point for these programs. it is important to note that for sip like all other programs they are broadly serving fema-defined eligible populations. in all cases there are parts of the populations being served that are not eligible. it doesn't grow eligibility numbers but shifts those

eligible to reimburse meant to 100%. if we could flip to the third and final sheets here. we sent this summary out this morning. i thought i would provide a high level view what this means. we put out the six month expenditure projection reports for the city last friday. this is a puzzle that is still in the works. basically this is showing you what total expenditures for the sip program are expected to be in the last projection three months and what we project as of friday. this is the current fiscal year we are talking about. there were expenses and revenues in the prior fiscal year as well as part of this puzzle. you can see the total expenditures required have grown $37 million since our last projection. that is predominantly because of policy choices made by the board

of supervisors and the city to maintain the size of the portfolio through the current fiscal year. that, of course, means the program is more expensive to operate in the current fiscal year versus last projection. you can see on the next line the good news from fema. we account for the portions of the program eligible for fema reimbursement and those portions that aren't. the expectations to fund the program grows by $83 million. it reduces the net cost that needs solved using other funding sources by approximately $41 million now in the current year. significantly lower than the $87 million we projected in the first quarter. a fundamental question is how much of that savings goes where? how much goes back to the big c fund, general fund, other

sources? that is the answer we don't have yet. the reason is that we are still in the process -- a number of funding sources federal, state, local were used to solve the 25% gap over the last year. we are now in the process of trying to rejuggle those puzzle pieces to maximize other federal and state revenue sources to minimize the local cost. that is a puzzle to solve given the number of dollar at play and $700 million related to covid response. i think we will have that picture shortly. it will be good news. it is that we can't quite as yet how much good news goes where. i should note the savings on this page versus last

projection, that deals with just the current fiscal year. we have sip expenses in the prior year as well that were matched with the 25% other nonfema source that is part of this as well. that is kind of the world as we know it today. we are waiting to see the updated fema guidance. they said it would be in several days. they said that several weeks ago. we look forward to getting it. it may be that we continue to get updated news from the new administration with fema going forward on other changes in the landscape. the president has made comments regarding other changes that will continue to change this math as we go. with that i would be happy to

answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, ben. i want to go to member friedenbach. >> if i read this correctly $83 million more from me fema than we expected. $45 million in uncovered costs of sip hotel rooms. that may go down when the other state and other analysis is done? >> actually what i suggest is to read down that six month column. that is where we are today. we expect the sip program to cost approximately $238 million in the current fiscal year, of which we expect fema will

reimburse $197 million, leaving a gap that needs solved with other revenue sores of 41. >> good news is especially sweet during covid. >> i agree. >> does that 41 number could be covered by other moneys coming in also? >> yes, within the sip program itself, we had general fund money, big c money given committee actions, we had several other state grants that were plugged in and another federal grant. it is an exercise of the juggling of pieces and juggling other revenues on the remainder of the city covid response. >> thank you so much. for me looking at the

expenditures that we expected now it is a savings. i really get excited about savings especially for things that we may be looking at in terms of talking about acquiring hotels, that could be amazing to do that. we have a unique opportunity as member reggio laid out. we may never see again. i know this is not your decision how the money is made but i am making a policy statement that it would be fantastic if we could as a body make a recommendation to the mayor and board of supervisors at our next meeting basically laying out we would like to put x amount of money from prop c and also leverage x amount of money from the fema reimbursement to be

able to purchase hotels. i think that most of the funds, the part that is hardest to come by is the ongoing operating. we need to figure that out. a lot of details to figure out. i want to put the thought into everybody's minds. it is an amazing opportunity. i would hate to lose that opportunity. thank you. >> that sounds like a great idea. i love savings, too, very exciting. thank you for sharing. i will pass it on to member haines. >> thank you, chair. thank you, ben. we could have this initial understanding and better understanding next month so we can determine what to do with this extra money, how we want to

divvy it up into programs. there are a lot of question marks still in the air, and i agree with member frieden back we can reinvest in additional housing and additional resources and more money is always good, especially when we have covid-19 and because of how businesses are rapidly changing in the economic landscape that our overall funding is going to be a question mark. we have a much more exciting administration am meanable to helping the population of the country. thank you forgiving us this presentation.

>> member nagendra. >> thank you so much. this is helpful. i wanted to ask a specific question about the shelter, what is appropriated in the shelter allotment on the first page of your presentation. i am trying to understand how to think about -- i know there is a lot here and it is not your decision about the money. is there anything in the december 20th release every serves and recapturing the dollars if fema was to reimburse. is there anything to go back to that shelter bucket? is that not how we should think about it? >> that is an excellent question. i believe the committee did provide general recommendation to the board of supervisors that you hoped these funds would be

reimbursed from other federal revenue sources if available. yes, if the money does come back to funds, it would be subject to the same rules in the funds. it would have to bereinvested in the shelter bucket or he wills where. the shelter -- elsewhere. the shelter bucket is maximum of 10% of the expenditures. you can increase that bucket and increase another bucket. >> thank you so much. well, i want to open it up for public comment seeing no more hands raised. >> members of the public call 415-655-0001 access code

(146)465-4190-pound pound. if you haven't done so press star 3 to speak. please wait until the system indicates you are unmuted to begin your comments. you have three minutes. we have a caller on the line. >> hello, caller. again, i am francisco de costa. i would like to address this agenda item. about a year now that i have been reviewing most of the actions with what is happening in our city. i am really interested in the quality of life issues. i have extensive experience

working with the federal government including fema, fema had the headquarters for a long time at the presidio. i was involved in some of the projects. what i see here is that we do not have an emergency management commander. there is something going on the masconie with no blueprint. how can our city hour home committee do due diligence when we don't have a blueprint working.

we made glaring mistakes at fema. they leased out hotel rooms. i will not go into details. then you have a meeting like this we the people should be told the truth. they should be accountability and transparency. you may show an excel spreadsheet but we at home can't read the numbers. how are we going to really participate in san francisco we are very astute apstellar people. in order to participate we need transparency and accountability. i know the controller very well, ben, but i am saying for the people at home to really understand what is really happening with the sros and

the hotel spaces, we haven't got a needs assessment report on how that has benefited san francisco. we have a population of 840. our taxing is despicable. less than 1%. i am saying the paradoxes, we have the experts at u.c.s.f. but not resources. it is all connected. i don't want to get onto our nerves, but i can go very deep. some people work with the homeless and i guess millions of dollars in the black hole.

>> your time is up. >> it is the right thing to do. >> thank you for your call. we will take the next caller. >> hello, caller. >> hello. sarah short with community housing partnership. this is in regards to the fema funding. also the prior item around acquisition. it is amazing to learn that we do have around $80 million that we were not expecting from the fema funding. i want to urge the city to use that to acquire more permanent housing units. this is a really rare moment where we have funding.

we also know we have units as we have heard responsive to the rfi. in the community there are a lot of hotel owners and other property owners who are eager to sell right now or master lease with the city. that is not an every day occurrence. we also have a population of folks in the sip hotels who are connected to case managers and we know where they are, we can find them. all of these things are converging at a time when our housing crisis is worsening. more people are on the streets especially we don't know what is going to happen when the eviction moratorium and so i want to urge the city as a controller said there is a lot of possibilities where the fema funning can be spent. it is imperative that the money

that hsh and ocd work together to figure out how they can possibly acquire more units, particularly appropriate units where people are going to want to stay. [please stand by]

>> thank you. i'm not allowed to report from the last meeting, except that we reached out in the turning point, with our communications and efforts. we should, perhaps, talk about the ordinary conversation. i was thinking briefly

before this meeting we could talk and then go to the rest of our community members in terms of the types of tools and technologies and aspirations we would like to achieve. we have the meeting scheduled for the 19th of this week, so there may not be a lot of time to collect all of though details, in terms of our communication efforts, and i'm guessing technology specifically. we'll be able to use all of the input from the community, and with the partners come up with a solution that will enable us to create the most amount of impact. >> chairwoman: do anybody have any questions? seeing none, i guess we'll move on. thank you, member hain.

so community impact and accountability liason. so things have really been moving. we are trying to schedule input sessions with many basically -- basically grouped into subpopulations and have many providers come to the input sessions. right now the groups that we've identified are, like, reentry, so folks who have touched the justice system, domestic violence, behavioral health -- if i miss any committee members, please chime in. but those are the ones so far. i've also met with a tenderloin group of

residents, interest groups, and various, like, types of community members. and they organized a ok 0 oco group, and they have presented a little bit, and liza who presented earlier is also from that group. and so looking at neighborhood input sessions as well. so maybe a tenderloin one as well as a bay view one. so we can definitely -- we've been talking about providing, actually, a list of all of the places we've outreached to. hopefully we can make that available soon. i know cynthia and our member nadra will talk a little bit about the

bigger stakeholder meetings. but the way we're thinking about formatting them is having three broad questions, what are people's priorities in terms of the funding, how would people like to stay engaged, so kind of touching on what member haines brought p. and that also leads into we are designing a community action board, so that is specifically for folks to input to us as a committee, and a board of social experiences that actually will be ongoing and be able to pay out of the 3% adman fund. i'm really excited to present that to you at the march meeting because we're still designing it. again, i think a lot of the input sessions will sort of dictate how people want to see that pan out, sort of seeing the interest of who wants to participate, and who would like to be on that board.

so, yeah, that's -- i hope i haven't missed anything. if i have, i'm sure there are members that have been in conversations that might comment. i'd love to hear any feedback, comments, questions. oh, the one thing i forgot, too, there will be an input session on glide, a bigger input session, hopefully the third or fourth week of march. that will have a similar design as the smaller input sessions, as i said before, but the one difference will be maybe because of the turnout size we'll have sort of multiple choice as far as different options prop "c" can use to be funded. so it is not as sort of abstract, so people kind of have some more, like, concrete examples of what prop "c" can be.

so i'm looking forward to your questions. thank you all. member ledbetter, jump in please. >> i'm excited to see all of this work taking off, and so i thank all of the community members for all of the work you've been putting in. [inaudible] the ball is out there, and there are things i haven't been able to be a part of, but i've heard a lot of popular feedback in the community. and there is a lot of appreciation that there are new and different and participatory ways to get involved in this process collectively. so thank you, everybody, for your work out there. the one thing that sort of is coming up consistently is just that people are finding it sort of difficult to access information through the

controller's office website. so i wonder if we -- what we can do to sort of support an accessible information platform. and we also want to be very careful about the transparency and having it in the appropriate places. i wonder if we can have more accessible places, and if member haines has been thinking about anything like that. >> chairwoman: thank you. member haines, please. >> yes, most definitely have been thinking about that since the beginning of the activation of our division, i should say, to this point. i would just like to point out in the interim, i'm wondering if the current support systems can support us. thank you, chair, for

telling us that there are some events that are scheduled. i know from previous meetings, there were some other events that were scheduled. until we have a website that can fully support us with being able to help us communicate what we all are doing, the documents that we're collaborating around, and that is good information we need to see internally, and a certain amount to expose externally. but to the extent we have these events, if they can be put on our calendars in some way, it will determine if we want to show up or if we can show up. i know we aren't going anywhere physically, but we need to be cognizant of

the virtual meetings. i don't know if you e-mail mary and the rest of us when those events are, other than seeing them occasionally on facebook. i personally haven't known what the dates were until we discussed them here. i just wanted to throw those out. those are the things i think about, a communications school website, for the purpose of communicating to the public, and i wanted to reiterate some of those things here so we can better support each other so we can know about this input sessions, some of which i definitely want to show up at for my own background, and how we can expose that for other people to show up. i leave it at that point. >> chairwoman: thank you, member haines. yeah, we'll definitely get those dates out. nothing has been scheduled. there is only one that is a date that is solidified right now, and i'll let

brett talk a little more about that because it is a behavioral health session. i want to collaborate on how to get that out to folks for sure. two things i'm realizing i forgot to mention before anymore questions or we move on, is the third big question that we're asking that i forgot to say was about barriers, and what do people see as their biggest barriers to being housed. and then another subpopulation as well that we have been communicating with is trans, so tgjip, and so, yeah, that is another group i wanted to shout out as well that they're on our radar. so, are there any more -- yes, marsha, please. did you have your hand up?

we can't hear you, if you're talking. i'm not sure... >> laura is unmuted. she has a page that is created, linked to our city, our home page. the 50th presentation is on there, along with her video. so this is the page that we're hoping to host as your central page for any liaison activities. so you can go ahead and

e-mail the information would like posted on to this website, and i can work with our tech folks to make that happen. >> chairwoman: great. thank you so much. one thing we've been hearing is it has been a little bit challenging for those who have been trying, like, in the controller's page and o co. there have been some struggles there. >> can you hear me now? >> chairwoman: yes. >> great. i did want to point out there is oco liaison activities, and as controller, we can try to find a way to publicize it more on the main site. we want to keep it on the city structure so that people who are members of -- members of the public really do have transparency into this information. we can try to make sure it is as clear as possible, but we really do rely on

you to tell us the types of contents, if you're reaching out to the public, so that we can make it clear, what are the activities of this committee to gain input. so we're going to build this out. right now we've only gotten one. we had, i think, member nadra's prior input session, and so that is all that is showing here. but we want to build out as the committee's liaison, kind of do your outreach and do your work, and we'll kind of build this page out. we also have the ability to do this in different ways, that we can kind of feel our way through. we are -- you know, as there is content that you want to share, is there is sort of information you're gathering that you want to push out, we want to put that on there so that everyone can have access to it and see it as it is happening, kind of at the meeting -- verbally here at these meetings, that we're using the website

more functionally for communication to the public about the committee's activities. we want to flag if we're posting information, it is part of the committee's work, so it is sort of allowed. but it would be useful to have you tell people if you're out in sort of the general public gathering input, to make sure they are aware that their input is kind of part of the committee's business then, and then maybe post it on our website, or kind of share that they have given that input. in these meetings, it is very obvious. you're here giving public comment, and you know what you're doing, but we want to make sure if we're posting people's input, that people want these types of housing and they know that is input that will be part of the public space. so when you're doing these sessions, let the folks know you're doing it on behalf of this committee and we're going to be sharing information about the input you're gathering on our public website, so

that they're aware, just from a transparency kind of rule. and that is some guidance from our i.t. folks and from our legal advisors, just to kind of keep everything -- make sure everyone understands that their input is part of the public space. so i just wanted to share that. and we will keep building this website. it is just a place-holder right now, as you continue to have content you want to share, and we'll build it out and make it as functional as it can be for you. >> chairwoman: thank you, laura. that is really helpful. and just to remember to let folks know that their input will be available for the public to see it. that's a good reminder for all of us. thank you. i did want to move us on to the next presentation from our member nadendra, who is the strategic investment plan liaison. so i'm passing it on to cynthia. >> thank you.

i wanted to share my screen. i'm sorry to have to show you some power point slides, and hopefully it will be helpful and quick. can everyone -- i'll just make sure i'm on the right flag here. we want to, again, develop recommendations for phase 3and 4, and fy 21, 22, and 23, and set future funding proposals, to ensure transparency and accountability, and consider other immediate-needs funding recommendations. last month i had said

these are kind of the key elements in getting us to that plan. vice chair dantonio gave us some input. we're wanting to hold the big-tent meetings, not the smaller one. we had one in january, and one planned for february 26th. some are population-specific, for people with experience, and it will be interlooped in some of these, and then separate. and, then, of course, the technical work of putting a plan together, getting the data and the input all kind of into one place. and then our monthly updates to the oversight committee. with the opportunity to provide feedback as well. i want to make sure that the committee feels in the loop of all of these pieces. i broke it down into the three areas i presented last month.

the first piece is to engage in a collaborative process, right? to make our home-funding recommendations. what we moved on in the past, since our last committee meeting, we are working with h.s.h. on a data request, to inform them that we're going to use to model what we're going to recommend in the different buckets. we're working with the housing pipeline liaison, to coordinate on the housing pipeline stuff. we heard a lot about that already this morning. developing a schedule with shake holders, and vice chair dantonio said we haven't scheduled a lot of these meetings. to member haines' point, we should publicize when we're nailing these down, and we can do it through the controller's website, and we're certainly open

to suggestion on how to get the word out. so these three big meetings are really to kind of come back to the large group of stakeholders, which is really anybody and everybody who wants to participate, and kind of have some key areas for input, and communicate the input we've already gotten and as to what progress we've made. it is sort of a voting body. it's not an action body. it is rather a place to get input and feedback. the smaller, targeted listening sessions, that deantonio talked about, i laid out some of the areas. the ones that we have potentially scheduled or the d.v. consortium and the family subcommittee and treatment on demand. everything else is open for scheduling, hosting. behavioral health, we want to have community liaison

member andrews geiting guidingthat work, and the justie and safety, we're reaching out to pay some specific agencies, bay view agencies. and one i talked to were was the bay street clinic, and the bay street community advocates, and lgbtq, and prevention. it might be helpful for us to have a prevention community liaison leader here -- i'm not sure we can take action on that -- because there is work happening on prevention with some of the agencies. and i'm not going to repeat some of the great work that is already happening. people with expertise on the community. the action board is another input session. and so the third -- the second piece, establishing desired outcomes and metrics for the plan itself, and to track and

communicate progress. so we're doing an analysis -- as thanks to the support of tipping point, which has an m.u. with the city, and they're helping us with a lot of the pieces. looking at h.s.h.'s strategic framework outcomes and see if we can use those as kind of our benchmarks. the mayor's home recovery plan, mental health and other plans that are in play, kind of do an announcement of those and see where can we kind of plug in and take the outcomes and align them across those different plans and initiatives. and we have to determine equity and justice pools, and figure out a way to develop those and make that kind of really the lens of the plan. as a committee, and i don't know if we have to schedule a time, maybe in the next meeting, but in some way we need to agree with the committee on what the outcome should be. while we have outcomes with the strategic framework, we have a

homeless reduction goal, reduction by 50% by 2022 (indiscernable) in the 2017 framework, but we can change that, of course. there are some numbers, and i didn't want to put them down because there are different numbers in different plans. there is mental health and prevention of different buckets in the o.h. legislation, and we don't have outputs that are "x" amount of beds and mental health services. we as a group have to al align ourselves on what we think are the outcomes, and i'm opening that up for discussion and how to get $. there. get there. because once we citizen set thoseplans, we will figure t

how to get there. and the whole committee can look at the different numbers and the different plans. and, finally, taking all of this input, the listing sessions, all of the reports, and the revolving door report is amazing input, and we're engaging tipping point with outlining the plan draft and putting all this together for us. and we also have a schedule. i will make sure this is available to all of the committee members. these are all movable, but it is a sprint, right? we have a lot to get to by april, by early april, to be able to put in recommendations that will go alongside the budget process. i'm going to stop talking. i know i've said a lot and very quickly. i'm happy to take questions or we can set aside time to discuss this at some point soon.

>> chairwoman: thank you, member nadendra. i have a question or comment -- i'll will member friedenbach go first. member friedenbach, why don't you go. >> i think we should plan on having a special meeting in here. it doesn't seem doable, and given how long our immediate needs thing went, and i would rather schedule it so people can, like, set aside time in their committee. because if we think about immediate needs, this is, like, three times bigger than that in terms of the amount of voting and stuff that we need. and also given kind of -- i'd like us to have, like, a solid plan that we're discussing, and have, like, a lot of room for discussion before we then vote on something, so we can really try to address everyone's needs ahead of the vote, if that makes

sense. anyway, that was just my thing. this looks fantastic. and all of the liaisons did amazing work, and thanks to everybody. >> thank you. if i could just respond to member friedenbach. i totally agree. i definitely think we should have a special meeting to get to some of these things and figure out what we, as a committee, decide on to move forward. this is a very aggressive plan to get back to the committee by the march 16th meeting to discuss the first draft. that will give us about a month to get input from all groups, but particularly from the committee, so we can vote by april 20th. but i think it would be helpful to have a special meeting. i totally agree. >> chairwoman: yeah. thank you member friedenbach and member nadendra. if we were to do a special meeting, would we vote at the end -- maybe this is a

question for mary, our lawyer. would that be a separate item? yeah, laura, please. >> hi. i think you can talk about it now in the context of your scheduling process and just give us a sense of when you think that fits in so that we can kind of work towards doing the scheduling of it. >> chairwoman: okay. and do we need to take a vote to see if all committee members are interested in having a special meeting, or we can all give a thumbs up or down? >> i don't think you take a vote -- >> chairman: i just wanted to make sure we weren't deciding for everyone? >> the chair convenience the committee and sets the agenda -- >> chairwoman: okay. so i guess i get to decide. okay. i think we should definitely have another special meeting.

cynthia -- or member nadendra or friedenbach was there, be looking at the timeline, what makes the most sense? >> i was just thinking about that. whether it makes more sense -- if we should fit one in between the march and april meeting so that we have more time to discuss an actual, solid is draft. that's my inclination, but i'm totally open to hearing from other committee members. i do want to figure out how we can have some alignment on what the outcomes are going to be? i don't know if that is a whole committee decision, or i can share that not in a special meeting -- that's a couple of things we need to figure out. >> chairwoman: okay. >> yeah. i feel like between march and april sounds good to me. unless someone feels really strongly about something else. i think maybe we can

say -- we can have mary send out some dates for, like, between those meetings and see what works. >> yeah -- sorry. >> chairwoman: no, i was done. that would be my say. if, mary -- if we could get some dates to vote on, as far as between march and april. and they can put it out that we can maybe have some, like, voting power at that special meeting. >> just a reminder, also, part of the timeline that cynthia laid out is the immediate needs vote that has to take place for stages three and four. just to keep in mind. i think that will take up a chunk of time at the march meeting. so having a mid-march meeting, i think, makes a lot of sense. there is also the possibility of doing a --

i mean, if we do an additional immediate-needs -- sf we're going to be asking for money to come out of the budget and finance committee for the next phases, and that would presumably happen after the march meeting, so we're going to be kind of on that timeline again. if people feel comfortable, then we can do that in one meeting. it might have maybe a recommendation for acquisitions in this fiscal year or it would have the release of the specific hotels, and there may or may not be adjustments to that. there is also the possibility of doing a special meeting between this meeting and the march meeting as well. but i'm open to either, but i definitely feel strongly we need the one between march and april.

>> chairwoman: yeah. member haines, please, your thoughts? >> i just want to advocate for two areas of thought: one that we're sort of hoping to calendarize as much of the year as we can. we can get the community feedback so we can address that community feedback in all of the meetings, so the community feels we're taking their feelings into consideration. to member friedenbach's point, it is muy hope we my hope wecan get through everyg so we can extract everything we can since fema will be reimbursing us. if we can get through that before the deadline, which i heard was september, in

terms of the reimbursement framework, if we can kind of make our decision, get the money, and get reimbursed, we can get that money back. as many times as we can pull that hat trick will be really exciting for our community (indiscernable). and now we'll make a really heavy impact. and that is what i was hoping in terms of our calendaring. the effect that all of this has on our community and engagement process internally, the more that we can organize ourselves so we can see some of the lovely reports that everybody is putting together, i think it would be helpful for us, especially in the community aspect, to see that before meetings. so for individuals, and i'm speaking about myself as well, certainly having

reports. if that can be delivered in the timeframe -- i think we have a 72-hour notice, i think, for any information or last-minute conversations that may be held. held, and that can be put in the packet material, before that 72-hour notice. the city typically supports us by providing documents, and i feel they have been doing a pretty good job of getting us those documents before the 72-hour deadline. i hope that we, as a committee, can follow suit with the city. i know that is difficult to do. but if we can do that before the meeting, so we can see information. if you're not having those conversations or e-mails

or participating in the meetings in between meetings, then we could have that data sent there before the meeting, which helps us to turn all of that information to the individuals so we can get feedback appropriately (indiscernable). >> chairwoman: thank you so much, member haines. >> i just wanted to thank, cynthia, for your work. i know it is not easy. you make it look easy, but i know a lot of thought went into that. >> i get a lot of help, but thank you. >> a lot of collective thought, right? and then to be able to present that. i also -- so i started kind of thinking, like, wow, we're going to be looking at outcomes. so there is a lot of ways that you can get