and thank you for joining us on this is a regular meeting of the building inspection commission. i would like to remind everyone to please mute yourself if you are not speaking and to listen in or for public comment, the number is 1 (415) 655-0001. the access code 24982605009. to raise your hand for public comment on a specific agenda item, press star three. when prompted by the meeting moderator.

the first item is roll call. [roll call] and we have a quorum. and the next is land acknowledgement. vice president tam. >> thank you monique the

ramaytush ohlone have never ceded lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as caretakers of this place as well as for all people who have resided in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, relatives, and the ancestors of the ramaytush ohlone and acknowledge affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. >> clerk: thank you. the commission will discuss and possibly adopt a resolution setting for its findings

required under assembly bill 361 that would allow the b.i.c. to hold meetings remotely according to the modified brown act teleconferencing set forth in the ab 361. president mccarthy. >> president: thank you. we're down to president's announcements, monique. >> i'm sorry. are all commissioners in favor to meet for the next 30 days remotely? >> commissioner: right. >> commissioner: right. >> thank you. and now president's announcements. >> president: you're doing great, monique. >> clerk: president's announcements please. >> president: good morning everybody and welcome to the b.i.c. january 19th, 2022. please forgive me in advance if i miss pronounce any names here. good morning and welcome to the building inspection meeting of

january 19th, 2022. and i'm joined today with fellow commissioners along with patrick o'rearden and d.g.i. i want to thank named omar cisar. he sent a notice of appreciation to mr. mark walls in permit services. he said i received help from mark walls and wanted to compliment him. i never had somebody from the department be as kind and helpful as he was. he really made it so much easier than previous experience and i wanted to genuinely thank him. then last week, a woman named

molly richardson who's selling her house wanted to praise suzanne wong. it was so refreshing to call the department and talk to helpful people. that's your leadership. in my twelve years of volunteering at d2 office it was always the case. thank you, suzanna and mark. i also want to thank all the hard work of the d.b.i. staff who continue to work diligently in these difficult times. you continue to work safely through thick and thin and we're better off and a stronger city for it. thank you all for participating in our virtual meeting today and please continue to participate in our public process.

madam secretary, that is my announcements. >> secretary: thank you. is there any public comment on the president's announcements? >> there is no -- there are no callers in the queue. >> secretary: thank you. moving on to item four is the director's report 4a, director's update. interim by director o'riordan. should i read the two bullet points. >> yes please? >> secretary: okay. housing inspection services calls related to life safety: hot water, heat, etc. and also recent fires in new york, philadelphia, and do buildings in san francisco face similar fire risks? >> director: thank you. firstly, i want to say how

proud i am of our staff for continuing to serve during these challenging times. the permit center was in fact open on christmas eve and new year's eve and has remained open throughout this covid omicron surge. our staff continues to show up each and every day to serve our customers and i want to thank them for their public service during such difficult times. last week, we received some questions from commissioner alexander-tut that i want to discuss and in light of the recent fires in philadelphia and new york, commissioner alexander-tut raised some very important questions about the steps san francisco takes to ensure the safety of our residential buildings for our tenants and indeed the property owners. her first question was has there been a seasonal increase

in calls to d.b.i. housing division for life safety issues including heat and water. and the answer is, yes, every year we receive a seasonal increase due to heat and hot water. this past december, we received 66% more complaints at the same time the previous year and saw a 60% increase in the number of cases for directors here. so our enforcement is keeping pace with the complaints even as we experience this surge and then commissioner tut's second question that she asked related to the deadly fires in new york and whether san francisco faces similar risks. so structure fires are a

concern in every city. san francisco differs from new york and philadelphia in several ways. the first and biggest is our weather. our winters are much milder than back east as you all know. san francisco doesn't experience the freezing cold and snow like philadelphia and new york. so we don't see the issues caused by extreme cold and the strain those temperatures put on buildings operations. we also believe our proactive inspection program and tenant outreach really helps identify and resolve these issues before they become real problems. last year, our community partners reached out to tenants more than 180,000 times to educate them on their rights and how to maintain safe living conditions. for example, we regularly taught people on how to avoid

situations where smoke detectors have been disabled, for example. this will help ensure safe living conditions, but also empowers tenants to advocates for themselves. for example, san francisco has a very robust sprinkler ordinance that requires sprinklers in single occupancy rooms. thank you, and i hope that answers your questions, commissioner tut. >> president: thank you. so commissioner tut, if we'll open it up to any other commissioners who might have more questions. so i wanted to just go through the commissioner vice president tam. >> commissioner: thank you for the report. i have no questions at this

time. >> president: commissioner alexander-tut. >> commissioner: thank you for the report. i thought there might be an increase, but i didn't know. it's very significant. are we facing any kind of difficulty with the omicron, you know, how are -- are there any challenges the department is facing and how are we overcoming those with covid? >> director: yeah. obviously, we were asked to facilitate remote work as much as possible in this surge and that won't be in place until mid february. i believe that, you know, we're starting to peak and maybe trending downward so that's a good sign. as of right now, our operations are not impacted.

we have good plans in place to facilitate direct remote work. so building, housing, plumbing, electrical, code enforcement, folks have the technology available to them where they can go directly to the inspections. so we believe that's working well. >> commissioner: thank you. thank you for the information. thank you for enlightening us on this. they're housing deficient and reminding us of all the different fire regulations. i appreciate the report. no further questions. thank you. >> president: thank you, commissioner. commissioner bito, please. >> commissioner: no questions. thank you, director, for the presentation. >> commissioner: i don't have any questions at this time. >> president: commissioner moss, are please. >> commissioner: no questions

at this time. >> president: commissioner sommer. >> commissioner: no questions at this time. >> president: do we have public comment on this? no. we keep going update on major projects. >> secretary: that is correct. >> president: thank you, monique. okay. >> secretary: and so item 4b, update on major projects. >> director: thank you again, president mccarthy and commissioners. this update constitutes projects that are greater than $5 million in valuation and it references the change from december over november's numbers and essentially there was a 1.5% decrease in total construction valuation. total construction valuation references filed permits, issued permits, and completed

permits and there was a 3.25% decrease in the total number of units in december over november. i'm available for any questions should you have some. thank you. >> president: thank you, director. madam secretary, next item. >> secretary: item 4c, update on d.b.i.'s finances. you're muted. >> sorry. good morning commissioners. deputy director for the department of building inspection. and our six-month report, we're currently finalizing the six-month report. we'll be meeting with the controller's office. it serves as a basis for the budget not only for our department, but city wide. that's normally why we have a

six-month report meeting with the controller's office. with that being said, because it's so important to the budget, we will provide a detailed report at our special budget hearing and we'll start off with that to give you an idea where we are now so we can look at projections that will be available for next year's budget. so we'll cover that topic at our special budget hearing next week. thank you. >> president: thank you. are we going to have the special hearing time frame did you say there? i know it was discussed. >> yes. it's on january 26th. >> president: okay. thank you. that's right. okay. thank you deputy director. commissioners, any questions in regards to budget in advance? >> thank you. >> president: seeing none. thank you. madam secretary, next item, please. >> secretary: item 4d, update on proposed or recently enacted state or local legislation.

>> good morning commissioners. not too much new to report this month. we have one new piece of legislation. january 11th, supervisor peskin introduced an ordinance amending the fire code to automatic require sprinklers in high-rise buildings. this is in expansion of an ordinance from 1993 that requires all buildings to install sprinkler systems within a twelve-year period. that exempted sprinkler systems in apartment buildings. what supervisor peskin introduced on january 11th would sort of end that exemption and would require high-rise apartment buildings to sprinkler their buildings by 2028. other than that, supervisor melgar, supervisor ronen, and

supervisor peskin's term amendment regarding the building inspection commission is currently awaiting action in rules. like wise supervisor chan's proposed her amendment which would change is also awaiting action in the rules committee. and supervisor haney's proposed ordinance to require developers of certain projects to maintain labor compliance bond is awaiting action at land use. his staff has agreed to attend next month's building inspection meeting to discuss the item. with that, i'm happy to answer any questions. >> president: thank you. i don't think we have any -- sorry. did i hear somebody with a question there? okay. thanks. >> secretary: next item is 4e, update on code enforcement. >> good morning commissioners. it's joe duffy, deputy director

of inspection services. i'd like to give you an update on our code enforcement and inspection divisions for december 2021. the number of building inspections performed was 4,707. number of electrical inspections was 2,933. and our plumbing inspection division carried out 2,735 inspections. a grand total of 10,375. pretty consistent number based on the previous few months as well. the services performed 704 inspections in december. they received 411 complaints and they had a response time over 95% within 72 hours. our code enforcement evasion, we sent 25 cases for director's hearing. we ordered, we had eight orders

of abatement issued and we referred -- the number of inspections performed by a code enforcement staff on complaints was 112. that concludes my report if anyone has any questions. i'm happy to answer them. thank you. >> president: commissioners, any questions? seeing none. thank you, mr. duffy. >> secretary: is there any public comment on the item 4, director's report. >> there is one public comment. >> secretary: okay. let me give you the. >> call-in user 650678, you're

unmuted. >> caller: yes. this is general public comment. >> president: that will be the next item. >> caller: thank you. >> president: okay. >> secretary: okay. thank you. so the next item is item five, general public comment. the b.i.c. will take public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda. is there any general public comment? >> yes, there is. mr. dratler, you're unmuted. >> caller: thank you. good morning. my name is jerry dratler. the project at 4837 18th street illustrates the challenges by d.b.i.. bernie kerning should not have

filed eight permits. how many bernie kerning projects are on the list to be reviewed by d.b.i.. there's an open $175,000 building permit for this project to address the planning department notice of enforcement. the n.o.e. is for excavating 822 cubic yards without a ceqa review. substantial demolition without depth calculations. conversion of two single flats with a unit without unit size calculation. jonathan pollard's sf garage was the cottor who performed much of the illegal work at 38847 18th street. mr. pollard employee structural

engineer harold howe was both the project's structural engineer of record and the supervisors structural engineer of the independent inspection service. mr. pollard owned mercury engineering and a1 inspection service. how is d.b.i. senior building inspector matt green able to approve the final structural engineering reports with an open building permit for a planning department notice of enforcement? b.i.c. commissioner sommer is the right person to review this project. she's a licensed structural engineer. the project should be put on the agenda for review at the subsequent meeting. thank you very much. >> secretary: thank you. >> president: is there any more general public comment, please? >> there are no more callers in

the queue. >> president: thank you, madam secretary. can we go to the next item. item six, please. >> secretary: item six, discussion and possible action regarding nominating members for president and vice president election to be held at the february b.i.c. meeting. we're going to ask for public comment first on this item. >> president: sure. please. public comment, please. >> there are no more callers in the queue. >> secretary: okay. of the thank you. >> president: so i'll open up to that time of a year again where we get to vote on each other publicly. what i want to do here today is we're going to discuss possible nominations and if i understand it right, with those nominations, we'll go forward. we don't have to second them or anything. we just want to go february.

give us a month to think about them and we can vote on them. is that my understanding? is city attorney's office, i just want to weigh in here and make sure that would be your understanding in how this should work here this morning? is that correct? >> yes. deputy city attorney. yes, that's the correct process. >> president: thank you. i just wanted to assure. with that, commissioners, i'm going to go down and i think what i will first talk about right now, i will not be putting my name forward for presidency. so i'd like that to be considered with my other fellow commissioners and i will work to each commissioner now. what my recommendations are the presidency and vice presidenty for the b.i.c. would be

president commissioner bito and vice president would be jason tam. that's what i'm going to start with that and work on the board of abatement appeals. so jason tam. >> commissioner: thank you, president mccarthy. are we nominating or are we putting forth our nominations for just the b.i.c. or is this going to be -- from what i'm hearing, we will be looking at the abatement appeals as well after we go through this. >> president: correct. >> president mccarthy. i think at this meeting, we can only deal with the building inspection commissioners. >> president: we're not doing both? >> the abatement appeals is

separate. so you can do that at the abatement appeals board meeting. >> president: okay. all right. i thought i asked that question earlier and we had to do both at the same time here. no? >> i don't think so. >> deputy city attorney, rob caplan. the item is for building inspection commission only at this time. and so i would put forward the names if someone nominates a commissioner for a position, that name goes on the list for consideration at the next regular b.i.c. meeting in february, so we don't need to for instance, president mccarthy is nominated. we do not need a second. if you would like to place

other names, this would be the time to do that and february would be the vote. >> president: thank you for the clarification. okay. vice president jason tam. >> commissioner: thank you. i want to hear what my fellow commissioners think. i also just want to put it out there that i think, you know, everybody here is very capable. i'm happy to serve with any of you and i'm happy to serve with all of you. so thank you. >> president: thank you, commissioner tam. commissioner alexander-tut. >> commissioner: thank you. that's exactly what i was trying to get at in my earlier conversation is trying to do the same thing in both meetings and unfortunately that's something to consider. so i think in order to not appear like we're voting, i

will just add new names and not confirm what i like or don't like about anything. so i put this on the agenda because i think it's good government for us to think about this stuff and not be blind sided the friday before the meeting. so i'm glad we're doing this. so thank you for taking this as an agenda item. i also, you know, i think that everyone on this commission is capable of this role and so i would just put forward just for conversation sake and because i hope we get to hear from people, from president commissioner sommer and commissioner eppler and for vice president, the same also. i would put commissioner bito, commissioner eppler, and commissioner sommer for vice president as just so we have

names on the list. and i think anyone can probably take themselves off the list if they don't want to. >> president: just clarification, commissioner alexander-tut. commissioner sommer as president. and vice president commissioner. >> commissioner: my understanding is i'm just adding names to an existing list not kind of indicating where i'm going. >> president: so you have commissioner sommer as president and commissioner bito as vice president, right? >> commissioner: maybe i'm misunderstanding what we're doing. i thought that what we're doing is that we're creating a list of nominations that we will all consider as a group. so i'm suggesting, i'd like to put more than one person on the list and i understand that commissioner bito is already on

the list for president and i would like to at eppler and sommer to that nomination list that we as a commission will look at. and then for vice president, i would like to have the same. you know, i understand that commissioner tam is currently on the vice president list for nomination and i would like to add bito,sommer, and eppler. if my perception i have in my head than what other folks are thinking, please let me know. >> deputy city attorney rob kaplan. you do not need to nominate a slate. you do not need to nominate a name and a pair. so i think what we're taking right now are commissioner names for each position and then in february, there would be every person who was nominated for president would be up for a vote whoever gets the majority vote first and

every commissioner who is up for vice president. but it would not necessarily be a slate at this time, although you can form slates in the month up to the next meeting. >> commissioner: deputy director, could you just remind us of the brown act rules so no one gets many many trouble. >> deputy city attorney rob kappla. you cannot discuss an item. an item would be an election of officers. that would be a quorum and in this case, it would be very easy to have a quorum where you may speak with people and it forms a chain. so if you have a comment with another -- with one other commissioner and would like to put forward yourself as a pair for a slate at the next

meeting, but you would not employ able to have that conversation with another commissioner. so i would recommend not trying to form a slate, but i would try and gather the names of the commissioners who are interested in each position. >> commissioner: thank you. >> president: are you good, commissioner tut? >> commissioner: i'm good. thank you. >> president: okay. commissioner bito, please. >> commissioner: i don't have any further nominations to add to the list, but i wanted to thank my fellow commissioners mccarthy, tut, and tam and i'm happy to serve if that's what comes to fruition. thank you. >> president: thank you, commissioner bito. so you would accept the presidency and you also would

accept the vice presidency, is that correct? >> commissioner: yes. >> president: thank you. okay. commissioner eppler, thank you. >> commissioner: thank you, president mccarthy. i don't have any further nominations at this time. i'm honored to be nominated for both posts, that's totally unexpected and, you know, i will tentatively accept the nomination that revolves around one or. >> president: thank you, commissioner eppler.

commissioner moss. >> commissioner: i have nothing more. i'm looking forward to the medical examination meeting. >> commissioner: i don't have any names to add either. is commissioner or vice president tam is already on the present list, is that correct? >> president: he is on i would ask for clarification i think just vice chair, right. >> secretary: that's what i have. >> president: yeah. he's been nominated for vice chair and, yes. that's correct. he's not been nominated for presidency. >> commissioner: understood. i would like to add him to the list of nomination for president. >> president: okay. perfect. and in regard to you for presidency and vice presidency, you were nominated for both.

>> commissioner: thank you. is it possible to do it at that time? >> president: yes. absolutely. >> commissioner: take your name off a list if desireded. and i very much appreciate the vote of confidence. thank you. >> president: okay. thank you, commissioner. so is there any further comment needed from my fellow commissioners on this for clarification? okay. seeing none. madam secretary, i think we've gone through public comment. so thank you, commissioners for that. i know it's not easy for us. commissioner bito, yes, please. >> commissioner: understanding that you're not putting your name up for nomination for president, i think that serving twelve years on this commission doesn't go unnoticed, so thank you for your service. >> president: thank you, commissioner bito.

thank you. it's been my honor. and i think i'm really, you know, heartened by the commission we have now and it's really a great bunch of commissioners who are going to do a great job and i think whoever the presidency is will be a strong president. so thank you for your comments. with that, madam secretary, why don't we go to the next item. we have done public comment. so. >> secretary: okay. item seven. >> president: yes, please. >> secretary: update regarding information sheet eg-02-merge escape and rescue openings to yard for existing or new buildings of r-3 occupancies. >> president: who is the lucky person who got to do this presentation because i had a lot of questions here i think.

okay. go ahead. >> good morning, president mccarthy. members of the commission, deputy of the department of building inspection. madam secretary, i have a presentation if you please allow me to share my screen. >> secretary: just one moment, please. i'm sorry. >> he should have presenter access now. >> good morning. >> there we go. can you see that? >> yes, sir. >> okay. so just a quick update. i will be summarizing what has been done so far and then turn

the presentation over so far to our initiative to engage to public coming in the near future. so if you remember information sheet eg-02, it has to do with the use of or access the proliferation of emergency scape openings on the back of existing or new single-family dwellings. this information sheet is restricted just to one and two family dwellings and their additions to, you know, as far as bedrooms go. knowing that san francisco is challenged with 0 lot line situations in most of its

residential properties, this information sheet allowed single family dwellings to have emergency rescue opening egress onto a rear yard which had an area of refuge that was 25' or more away from the building. existing building code requires a minimum separation of 50' away from the structure and so this information sheet allowed the concession down to 25' knowing that the average single family dwelling property did not allow for the 50' requirement at the time, the original information sheet wasn't recognized that the emergency rescue openings were

essentially not accessible to the fire department and in a subsequent determination by the state fire marshal, it was, you know, this was brought forward. so this information sheet deals with the code requirement which is on the last line here where there is no access to the public way or yard or court that goes to the public way so as i started to say, last year, the fire marshal declared these rescue openings had to be successful to the emergency personnel not only for egress of the oxygen, but for residents trapped on the second floor and third floor and in recognizing that these openings were not available or

immediately accessible to emergency personnel, the fire department and the building department decided to remove the information sheet from circulation. in a subsequent outcry from the public, we're now looking at options it is currently reinstated and allows the design professional to weigh in on the rescue ability of these emergency egress windows. each application of or each project permit will require an ab-005 which is an application or request for alternate means and methods so that each situation can be looked at and analyzed by both building and

fire so that we agree on the access to emergency personnel and/or the ability for occupants to self-rescue and their way to the back of the building. with that, i'm going to turn this over to jeff buckly for our program plan to engage the public. >> thanks. jeff buckly, policy and public affairs director with d.b.i.. i'm going to walk through with you the road ahead and i'm happy to answer any questions you have related to the process. so d.b.i. and the fire department have committed to partnering with the american institute of architects on a series of workshops. i think the idea as we spoke to

is to try and find some compromised solutions that can work for the design community as well as, you know, maintain the purpose of both the state fire marshal's changes and, you know, our local building officials and fingerprints requirements. and so what we are aiming to do is to create and we have a schedule ahead of us where we have the goal of trying to come up with a proposal that we would be able to have before you in march and ultimately that through our sub committees both in february as well as in march as well. next slide, please. so this kind of lays it out. i think, you know, we intend to have a series of up to three meetings with the design community.

we're structuring it in a way so we can use the first meeting to ultimately identify the challenges that we all face and what the design community faces. we want to hear them out and ultimately see if we can then in subsequent meetings be able to engage with them on, you know, a series of compromises that would allow us to be able to come up with something that's mutually agreeable. and ultimately, we will continue that through our sub committee process so that members of the public outside of a.i.a. would be able to engage with the conversation as it develops. so we intend to do that both in february and we intend to do that in march. and then ultimately, we will be back to the advisory committees in march and then, to you and your march meeting with the final version for your review. so i'm happy to answer any questions you have related to the process. and thank you, commissioners.

>> you need to unmute yourself, president mccarthy. >> president: my apologies. thank you, mr. buckley. i'll come back to you with any questions, but i'd like to open it up to public comment to see if anyone has any comments. >> secretary: is there any public comment? >> one caller in the queue. i'll unmute them now. i don't have the ability to unmute them. >> secretary: you do now. >> thank you, much. caller, 415825, you are unmuted. >> caller: thank you. happy new year everyone. do i have two minutes or three minutes.

>> two minutes. >> caller: okay. i better talk fast. hi everyone. i sent the letter through mcharris to the commission. i hope you read it. it's a particular project. maybe it's an anomaly. it certainly seems extreme, but the point i wanted to make and i think mr. buckley may have answered that is you need to talk to the planning department. you need to talk to the planning commission about this because they constantly say they do not deal with excavations and but this increase in excavations putting living space including bedrooms often below grade certainly with poor access, a project that i sent you which happens to be right across the street from me and the issues were raised in the d.r. hearing that this had bad egress, but

unbeknownst to the public, the planning commission didn't really look at. even between now and march, whenever you resolve this issue, i really hope that you will have a conversation with the planning department and the planning commission as they review projects between now and then and i guess the only other question i have is this is an issue also for our two occupancy and i hope you read the e-mail that i sent in the items because i think it's an interesting example and one that doesn't have a real solution. thanks a lot. take care. bye. take care. >> president: thanks. we did read your e-mail. is there any public comment

caller. >> there are no callers in the queue. >> secretary: thank you. >> president: back to my fellow commissioners. commissioner vice chair tam, do you have any questions. >> commissioner: thank you, president mccarthy. just to go off our public comment there, has there been any feedback from planning department in regards to this? >> president: mr. buckley. >> commissioner: or jeff? >> i would refer first to debel and then i can refer to our engagement after that. >> i believe the caller is asking for d.b.i. input on this because it may be okay according to the planning code. i did also review the letter and the plans that were sent through. it does have building code issues typically on egress, we

don't send people down into a well and then have to come up and, you know, into the rear yard there. i also noticed that the egress path did pass in front of other openings too which is problematic from an egress perspective. if you can imagine, are those other openings could be engulfed and compromised and therefore limiting the exit or egress from that. so i think what the caller's asking for d.b.i. to weigh in as opposed to the planning commission. >> from my vantage point, the present will be outlined with historic preservation staff,, so that is apart of our engagement strategy. >> commissioner: thank you.

i look forward to the meeting in march. thank you. >> president: thank you. commissioner alexander-tut. >> commissioner: thank you. no other questions from me. >> president: commissioner bito. >> commissioner: the only comment i have is i'd like to applaud d.b.i. and the san francisco police department for engage figure. i know this is important for the firms and single family residents here in san francisco that are trying to expand and better their homes for expansion. so thank you very much for the continued effort and we look forward to your presentation in march. >> president: thank you. commissioner eppler. >> commissioner: i like wise want to thank you for putting together an outreach plan that, worries into department to make sure everyone is closer to, worrying on the same page. i know that's often a challenge with the city family. and, you know, with that, i look forward to seeing what

comes back to us in march. thank you. >> president: thank you, commissioner. commissioner moss, please. >> commissioner: no comments. thank you for your report. >> president: commissioner sommer. >> commissioner: no questions from me either. thank you. >> president: and thank you for your presentation and mr. buckley here. quick question. how are you coping with the existing projects coming in now? is that problematic for you? is there a lot of backlog on that? and forgive me if you addressed this or mr. buckley, you addressed that. if i go in the morning, what is procedurally, how do we get through the process while you work this out in march, deputy director? >> so president mccarthy, what we're doing right now as each project comes up, the plans examiner is notifying the applicant of the potential need

for that should accompany all projects that use this information sheet and so what that form does is engage the fire department and the building department and a common review of the solution and the adjoined approval and request for comments because currently there is no catch all for projects out there. we don't currently have a backlog for this, but a normal workload that it is. so this is not delaying projects as far as i know. >> president: okay. all right. okay. well, look, this will be i

think will be dealt with in the outreach and with the stakeholders working through this and looking forward to getting the outcome in march, here. thank you, deputy director and thank you, mr. buckley for that update and good luck on your endeavors here. okay. thank you. and, madam secretary, next item, please. >> secretary: item eight, commissioner's questions and matters. 8a, inquiries to staff. at this time, commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents policies practices, and procedures which are of interest to the commission. [please stand by]

>> -- and we do -- our staff, as well, has been really, really helpful. we've had some cases recently, but as i said, everyone's

stepping up to the plate, and it has not impacted our services or ability to inspect it. [indiscernible]. >> thank you to the entire d.b.i. staff and their commitment for actually pushing through this. the other question i have is actually for chief housing inspector. i know that early on, i had a chance to tour the s.r.o.sand chat with the pandemic response team with regard to the s.r.o.s. what's going on with that with regards to life and safety? >> clerk: i'm not sure if he's

on the call. >> okay. well, that's fine. i can reach out to him. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner alexander-tut? >> thank you to the commissioners for your comments and for your ideas. one of the things that i would like to hear in february and in the coming months, i would like to hear where we're at with the racial equity action plan, what the update is, how we're meeting our goals, sort of a reminder to whoever becomes president next month. secretary harrison, you've been amazing at keeping us on track, but i want to keep that part of that ecosystem in our conversations and would like to -- i don't know if anyone's prepared to say anything now.

i don't want to put anyone on the spot, but i would like to hear something in the coming months. >> okay. thank you, commissioner tut. commissioner bito, please. >> i have no questions at this time. >> thank you. commissioner [indiscernible]? >> thank you. i have two pieces, one borne out of the prior meeting that we had. at the prior meeting, when we were discussing the gas line foundation issues, there was a question about the number of soft story abatements that have not been completed in the enforcement process or making sure that happens, and it was said, you know, during that meeting that over the years during the multiple soft story issues, we still had people out of compliance. i think it would be good to get reports on that process to get those soft stories into

compliance. you know, this is all coming out of the 1989 earthquake. it's been quite sometime. every day, we get closer to the next earthquake where this will become an issue once again, so making sure that we're prepared for that eventuality is important. the second piece comes out of additional reporting and about the backlog in plan permits. you know, i certainly understand, as with a lot of different agencies that in-person work is important, that the department has struggled, particularly with the omicron variant where people can come in and work efficiently. i know we get updates from the department on the number of folks that are out, and i think it would be useful to give more comfort to the public if we can look at, you know, how many plans are backlogged. not just, you know, where they are, if they've gone into the

review process, but also to have data about how long that review is taking to different projects. and maybe it's a review of you apportioning out to show the different dollar amounts of projects because certain complicated projects will have a longer review, but providing that certainty to the public that projects, you know, as we do get backed up is going to be expected, given the current health situation, that we're in the process of getting through those projects in a timely fashion, i think, will help calm some nerves that will be flared up by what's most recently happened. thank you. >> you're muted, president mccarthy. >> thank you, commissioner eppler. we will get back to you on the february meeting with those two things. any member of the staff want to weigh-in on it now or we can

wait until february. >> president mccarthy and commissioners, and to your question, commissioner eppler, we'd be happy to look into that and provide you with a report that relates to numbers as best we can for the february meeting. thank you. >> that would be on the soft story and the permit backlog. >> both items, yes. >> okay. are we good, commissioner eppler? yeah? >> yes, sir. >> okay. thank you. commissioner moss? >> nothing from me at this time. >> commissioner sommer? >> nothing from me, thank you. >> clerk: call for public comment on item 8-a.

>> operator: there are no callers in the queue. >> clerk: so we'll move onto item 8-b. future meetings and agendas. at this time, the commission may discuss and take action to set the date of a special meeting and permit those items that could be placed on the agenda of the next meeting and a future meeting of the building inspection commission. the next regular meeting is on february 16, 2022. also, there will be a special budget meeting on january 26, 2022. president mccarthy? you're muted. >> thank you, madam secretary. just point of order here. we do have a meeting on friday, correct? >> clerk: yes, friday, the 21. i think it's at 1:30.

>> clerk: yeah, that's a special special meeting. we forgot about that. >> okay. just wanted to confirm that's on there. i'll just open it up to the floor. anybody want to add anything, fellow commissioners? >> i don't know if -- this isn't a question to staff, but maybe it's a question to you, president mccarthy, or maybe it's a question through the chair to the deputy city attorney, but i know we are in receipt of the city attorney's briefing on the investigation to the interim director, and, you know, i think that some of the essential findings are very good. there's a lot in there, and i think it's a lot that gives us insight into, like, some of the past practices of, you know, previous d.b.i. directors and just to kind of understand what -- what was going on, and so i'm wondering if we can have

a special, even a future agenda item or with the possibility of having a -- i'm not -- i'm not quite sure if it's even an open session or closed session. i would leave that up to the city attorney, but i think a briefing on that memo. it's 4 two-pages, i believe, and there's a lot in it, and a lot of important insight into the department. it does, i think, clear our interim director of any of the accusations of wrongdoing, which is pleasing to find out, so that's great, but there's also a lot of information in there, and i think it would behoove the commission to ask questions about the proper structure and how that would happen because it seems that there are on going investigations, and i wouldn't want to jeopardize that any way. >> thank you, commissioner tut.

and deputy city attorney rob, do you want to weigh-in on that? >> yeah, deputy city attorney robb kapla. we can discuss with the city attorney team if there's any follow up. i know we had a lot of information in a memoranda relatively close to today's meeting, but i would need to clarify whether follow-up questions we believe could be held in open session or closed session. i believe the purpose of providing the report in a public fashion was to provide all the information to the commission as a whole and to the public. if there are specific commissioner questions, that could be held outside of a

meeting, but as far as a full meeting, whether it would need to be in open session or closed session, we could definitely discuss holding that at a future meeting. >> okay. thank you for that. >> commissioner bito, please. >> i don't have any further comments or suggestions for future agenda items. thank you. >> commissioner eppler? >> i have no further items beyond those items in 8-a. thank you. >> thank you, commissioner eppler. commissioner moss? >> no further items. thank you. >> commissioner sommer, please. >> no further items for me. thank you. >> do we need to go to public comment on that? >> clerk: public comment on 8-b? >> yeah. >> clerk: yes. >> operator: there are no callers in the queue.

>> okay. next item. >> clerk: item 9 is review and approval of the minutes of the special meeting of december 6, 2021. >> motion to approve special meeting minutes 2021, december 6. >> second. >> clerk: is that a roll call vote or all in favor? >> aye. >> clerk: you can just ask if all commissioners are in favor or are any opposed? >> clerk: are any opposed? motion's unanimous. we can move onto item 10. >> clerk: yes. >> clerk: okay. thank you. a review and approval of the regular minutes of the regular meeting of december 15, 2021. >> motion to approve the regular minutes of the meeting of december 15, 2021. >> second. >> clerk: all in favor? no opposed? that's unanimous, and the next

item, 11, is a motion to adjourn. >> through the chair? >> madam -- or vice chair tam, please. >> so before we adjourn, i want to wish everyone a happy lunar new year that's around the corner coming up. i wish you a year full of love and laughter, so -- [speaking cantonese language] >> clerk: okay. all in favor? the time is 11:13. we are adjourned. thank you.

>> clerk: of the abatement appeals board. i would like to remind everyone to please mute yourself if you're not speaking, and the first item on the agenda is roll call. [roll call]