community-based teams work daily to connect people to services, >> good morning. today is wednesday november 16, 2022. regular meeting of the building inspection commission. i would like to remind everyone please mute if you are not speaking. the first item on the agenda is roll call. [roll call]

we have a quorum and next is our land acknowledgment. >> the building inspection commission acknowledges that we are on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush ohlone, who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. as the indigenous stewards of this land and in accordance with their traditions, the ramaytush ohlone have never ceded, lost, nor forgotten their responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. as guests, we recognize that we benefit from living and working on their traditional homeland. we wish to pay our respects by acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. >> thank you. members of the public who are listening in, the public comment call in number is

415-655-0001. the access code is 24811873260. to raise your hand for public comment on a specific agenda item press star 3 when prompted by the moderator. next we have item 2, fiendings to allow teleconference meetings under california government code section 54953e. the commission will discuss and possibly adopt resolution to hold meetings or commissioners to attend meeting remotely accorded to the modified brown act teleconferencing. is there a motion to continue to meet remotely? >> motion. >> second. >> all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> thank you. motion carries. next we have

item 3, president's opening remarks. >> i want to say good morning to my fellow commissioners. department of building inspection and are attending public. one thing i reflected on recently is that i have been president for the past year and last meeting we went through a number of items that started looking at from a tracking standpoint and number of those items with respect to the c study, the 5 year strategic plan and some of the other items we continue to follow on the client service subcommittee are things i look forward to continue tracking or looking forward to the progress of. that being said, these items potentially could get moved to the december based on timing quorum so want to aprize the public of that. i believe it is item 10, 11 and 12 that could

potentially be moved to next month. the importance of continuing to keep those aprest of those. thank you. >> thank you president bito. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, we will move to itoom 4,b director's report. 4a, director's update. >> good morning. i'm patrick o'riordan director of dbi. i want to start off with some excellent news. earlier this week we published our new website on sf gov and gotten rave reviews for simplicity and ease of navigation. i haven't a chance to encourage you to take a look and let you know your thoughts, but please take a look if you can. i want to give a big thank you

to our communications team for leading this effort. the many dbi staff served as subject matter experts to make sure the new pages were accurate and up to date and our wonderful partners at digital service who made the transition realty. thank you all. moving on, happy to share recent success from our small business ambassador program. a small business contacted for help to get final inspections and sign off to open a restaurant in what is called the laundry mat. they wanted to open by thanksgiving and knew they were close to the finish line. we sent trev r burn and he worked with building inspector (inaudible) to help resolve the final items that needed to be submitted. we er were

were able to sign off the project. the owner were grateful for help and expressed appreciation for assistance. proud of high level of customer service provided by our inspection team. great work, team. and for today's agenda, we'll touch on a number of topics including changing the permits given priority. a briefing on our nation strategic planning process and update on our fee study that we are just about to get underway. and i have one more item i like to bring to your attention regarding tenant improvement before i close out my remarks if we can bring up the slide with doti sonya or monique.

>> the slide is showing now. it isn't showing in the room but it is showing. there it is. >> thank you. this is the trending of our oti permit since well before the pandemic. since the first quarter of fiscal 18, which is july 1, 2017 to june 30, 2018. we hit a peak of about 800oti permits in the quarter of 4th quarter of fy2018, and as we all know we plummeted during the depth of the pandemic 4th quarter of 2020 and bounce back up again

and we have been kind of leveling off where you see the first quarter of 22-23. essentially we hit a high of about 800 oti permits prior to the pandemic. dropped down to about a hundred in that quarter that was like the second quarter that we were in the pandemic and now we are at about 450 per month. that is in relation to a high of 800 before the pandemic. the take-away is that oti permits office tenant improvement permits are down substantially and that is attributed to many reasons as we all know, so just wanted to give you that update. that concludes my director's report and available for any questions. >> thank you.

>> sure. >> do you think that will-that is (inaudible) that other permit process we were reviewing is completely different? sorry, i think it is unrelated. >> yeah. okay. thank you president bito. >> thank you. our next item is 4b, update on major projects. >> okay. so, this is a update on our major project including projects that are valued-work valuation of more then $5 million and it speaks to what permits were filed, what permits were issued and what permits were completed and this is for the

month of october. so, moving on to this slide here, in october of 2022, 4 permit applications with estimated construction valuation of $5 million were filed with dbi. these projects are anticipated to add 102 new housing units and collectively valued at over $60 million. they include a application for an office tenant improvement at 300 tony stone crossing part of the mission rock development. there was also a application filed for 530 church street which is planned to have 100 units with 24 proposed as affordable. last month we issued three high value permits with collective

valuation. one was for a new university san francisco basketball facility at 2335 golden gate. (inaudible) and if we can move on to the last of the slides. lastly, dbi final 4 high value project. one was 96 unit jazzy collins offer permanent supportive housing and oorlth is for renovation of all guest rooms at the (inaudible) that concludes my presentation on major projects. >> do commissioners have any questions on this? >>er i have one question. do you guys

track fee wavers for affordable housing? >> i believe we have the-we have the data. we probably have it assembled somewhere, i can get back to you on that commissioner. >> thank you. next we have four c, update on dbi finances. >> good morning, alex (inaudible) have a short update on dbi finances. looking forward to sharing the update. quarter 2 january is result of budget planning, year end projections and are fee study

proposals. so far in fiscal year 23, we have received 15.6, $85.9 million revenue budget, and we have spent 24.3 against our 91.2 expenditure budget. the revenue is a decrease from the same period last year, however last year appeared a bit front-loaded and still hoping to come in on budget at this point but it is still early. on the expenditure side, we are spending a bit more then prior year but that is all most entirely due to salaries and benefits. the city approved 5 and a quarter percent colas in fiscal year 23 for all most all staff, so that resulted in increased expenditures. and the number of permits is slightly down compared to last year, but again last year

appeared bit front-loaded. the total valuation is slightly higher then last year and are hoping for a bit of a surge in december before the code change in january. i are would be happy to answer any questions. >> any questions, commissioners? >> how much do we have left in the fund to capture the-because i believe that dbi has been operating in a negative. how much is left to cover the increase in expenses? >> so, right now we have a little over hundred million in cash but only $21 million available for appropriation. we

have already committed the difference to balance fiscal year 23 and fiscal year 24 so significant amount of those reserves were committed to this year and next year to balance the budget. so, the number to focus on would be about $21 million. >> so the-can you explain how you are using-when you say appropriations what does it mean? what are you using the money towards? >> we have hundred million in cash, but we also have prior year continuing projects that we have appropriated and have not spent yet, so assuming that those prior year amounts are-we carried forward the budget from prior years assuming we spend those amounts and purchase orders or unspent funds committed in prior years carried forward-the city has a two year budget and so for fiscal year 23-24

and 22-23 approved last year, we committed to using our fund balance to balance expenditures. we have the cash in our bank account now, but we have already committed about $79 million to existing continuing projects that have not been spent yet and on future year sources. >> is that something that would be part of your financial report so we understand-at what point is the bucket get capped out? to balance the budget because we were part of that discussion last year. i know it was a concern last year for the commission, but at what point when you hold these other cash funds in reserve for projects you are holding that in

advance. when are we out of money? >> well, current projections have us running out of available for fund balance available for appropriation around fiscal year 25. we are working closely with controller office, mayor office to come up with solutions. that assumes nothing changes from today. the fee study will be a large part of solving that problem and we are hoping to generate significant revenue and also looking at expenditure reductions mostly in work orders and if possible cbo grants not canceling them but shifting the funding source to other departments. all sorts of other things we'll get into in the fee study items. there are items the department-there is work the department does that may not be charging for and there

are certainly opportunities for extra revenue recovery that we will be looking into. >> when i-the supporting material for the fee study was sent out. the fees appear to be decreasing, is that what i- >> again, we can-that will be part of the item number 11, the fee study. i can talk about history. there was a reduction in 2015 and since then no changes to the fees have been made, so there is a lot that we are hoping to accomplish with the fee study and part of which is giving ourselves flexibility to adjust fees annually or more frequently then once every 7 years, so that we can make sure that we are adequately recovering our expenditures. >> i guess my only commissioners have questions? sor . >> we did the budget discussions early in the year and we

approved the budget. can you remind or someone remind me, do we do this annually or every 2 years? we the commission. >> we do it every-there is 2 years of budget but revisit every year. >> we have these conversations again. [multiple speakers] >> thank you. >> with wh we speak about the budget probably in january meeting, i will present materials on the fund balance usage over time, how much we have left, projected usage, all that information. >> i guess my question is, just from a tracking standpoint, when you are doing these monthly financial reports, i presume you are tracking the monthly performance of dbi against what you projected to balance the budget. >> projections are difficult especially in the beginning of the year. expenditures revenues are not always steady. they go up and down. it depends on when

invoices come in. sometimes they come in all at the end of the year, sometimes come in at the beginning. it is very difficult to project using straight line to determine where you will be at. that is quhie we tend to focus our efforts 6 month and 9 month. a little later in the year when we can have more confidence in where we'll end up on both expenditure and revenue side, but yes we do monitor to make sure things are not going crazy, high or low on revenue or expenditure side. >> along those lines do you compare year to year because you are saying the ups and downs and there is seasonal things in terms of permits, end of year things in terms of permits. do you track generally like compare-i saw some of the ones in the presentation, but this is unusual based on the past many years where it is this way or is there that type of comparison? >> we do look, but it is very hard to account for all

factors that happen last year versus this year. it is very hard to project the future based on what happened in a prior year. it could be informative for a sanity check overall, but those projections early in the year are very difficult to make. >> can i ask a question, more global. how much of your expenses is expected to be covered by revenues? is dbi supposed to be a fully self--reliant- >> yes, we are entirely supported by fees, no general fund support. >> no- >> entirely special revenue supported. >> i don't think i have anymore questions accept one request. you have a-on your operating fund you have a budget for revenue and expenditures. i guess i would be curious because we only look at that review it once

a year. it feels like what you are doing to tracking what you are doing on a monthly basis against how you balance the budget is something i would be curious to see. >> sure. usually what happens a bit later in the year is there will be a projection column and then a projected balance column. those are not shown now because it is early. those are variable are. if we show the columns we probably project everything on budget. >> that's okay. >> we can certainly show those amounts and i believe they are in the packet as well, the details. in the presentation itself, we can include that for the next meeting and going forward. >> okay. thank you. are there any other further questions? >> (inaudible) >> oh.

>> commissioner alexander you can speak. commissioner alexander, did you have a question? guess she didn't. >> i did have a question, thank you. so, i'm a little confused because i'm [audio cutting in and out] looking at the memo on (inaudible) october 19, 2022. [audio cutting out]

look like the powerpoint but-(inaudible) >> can you please repeat? >> your audio is breaking up a little bit. >> (inaudible) let me try calling in. >> i believe so. is there any specific figure that you are notice may be incorrect? >> we can hear you and deputy director said is there a specific number you are asking about? >> because it looks on

the memo that (inaudible) fund balance is zero year to date. that is 21-22. (inaudible) trying to see where the - >> okay, i see what you are saying, the zero budget there. >> (inaudible) do we have a memo detailing the (inaudible) where we are today? >> i think he has response for you. go ahead. >> sure. i believe the use of fund balance is 27.7$27.7 million is the use of fund balance. the above 57, the $58 million there is the actual treasure services and revenue we are bringing in and

the other revenues are the use of fund balance and $300 thousand that was add-back from the board of supervisors for a specific project. >> did you hear that response? >> [unable to hear speaker due to audio quality] i would like to see (inaudible)

>> thank you. that concludes comments. thanks alex. >> thank you. next we have 4d, update on proposed or recently enacted state or local legislation. >> morning president bito and commissioners. christine (inaudible) assistant director and will give the update on legislation. next slide, please. so, the 2022 code adoption ordinances, the 6 ordinances updating the code cycle update ordinances were approved by the board

of supervisors on the 2nd reading november 1 and signed by the mayor and happy to say signed by the mayor november 10 so those are done in time for the new code going-being active on january 1, 2023. other ordinances we are tracking, the proposed ordinance to amend the first year permit license and business registration fees for certain businesses that is the small business fee waver that went into effect last year. this new ordinance expand the number of businesses eligible for the fee waver and makes the changes ret row active last year when the original ordinance passed and that approved by the board of supervisors last week and expected to be signed by the mayor. secondly, the proposed ordinance amending the planning building code to increase fines and penalties for

violation, that is it ordinance that you reviewed at the last meeting and recommended approval and that's still pending further action at land use and transportation. we have a couple hearings coming up. one is to review the economic impact and potential tax revenue loss of vacant office buildings. this hearing has been scheduled for budge t and finance but the date hasn't been set. secondly, supervisor mar called a hearing on accessory dwelling units under local and state mandated programs and what applications are in the pipeline. looking for a status report to see how the programs have done and that hearing has been scheduled for december 5 and the department will be presenting on adu permitting processes and the data. that concludes my presentation. any questions?

>> fellow commissioners, do you have any questions? i don't have any questions. ft >> thank you. next we have item 4e. update on inspection services. >> good morn commissioners. joe duffy deputy director inspection services. i'm pleased to provide an update this morning on the activities and performance of inspection services division. next slide. in the month of october building electric plumbing conditions (inaudible) 908 percent of those inspections were conducted within two business dates of the date requested by it the customer meeting the target of 90 percent. in the same month housing inspection conducted 876 inspections with 107 being routine inspections of multifamily housing.

next slide. building electrical plumb ing received (inaudible) that was well exceeding the target of 85 percent. additionally, our code enforcement sent 63 cases to hearing. our housing inspection service received nearly 43 safety and heat complaints and responded to 77 percent within one business day. they also received 305 other complaints and responded to over 93 percent of them within 3 business days. housing inspection services also abated 328 cases with notice of violation and sent 33 cases to a director's hearing. that concludes my report and i'm available for any questions. thank you. >> commissioners have any questions or comments? >> i have a question.

i'm still stuck on the budget. i think that-not on inspection-sorry. >> what is your question president? >> i think that-i'm not an accountant so apologize if my questions are stupid. the number shared in october-the october report the actuals are so much lower then for the september. can you explain that? >> i will take a look back at the previous report. i imagine it

was timing thing, perhaps the old report was run with older data and this one is more up to date. for example, these are-were right at the end of the month and beginning of the next month so we have all october in here, but i will take a look back at the prior report and i can follow up with a explanation. >> just for my own context when we compare month to month and how that compares to other things so we have a broader context to compare this to and understand how the numbers-how dbi arrives at the numbers because i see your budget is relatively the same or close to, but the actuals are so much lower for last october and then there is this carry forward that is sort of like a

asterisk at the bottom that went from 3.4 to $5 million so i think like for someone like myself who isn't an accountant if you could show in context how the numbers are arrived at and also how that compares to how dbi balances the budget for the two year bracket that- >> sure. regarding the carry forward at the bottom, these are open purchase orders from prior year that have not been completed for the most part or manual carry forwards if we have performing work for other departments that we have not yet completed and billed then we carry forward those expenditure appropriations from the prior year to currents year to perform that work and similar if we have a vendor who has performed service but have not billed us, we carry forward the

budget. that is what the $5.1 million is. regarding the actuals, those are straight from our general ledger. our set of financial books, our financial system that entire city uses, so those are the actual booked expenditures as of now. the vast majority of them are salary (inaudible) and those are posted every 2 weeks so there could be timing issues there, but all of these expenditures are what has actually gone out the door or come in the door on the revenue side. >> why did salaries from $50 million to 17? >> the budget $53.9 is for the entire year and the year to date spending. >> no, that is also in the actual from last

month, 51.1. >> the budget from last month was $51 million? >> actual was 51.1. >> i can take a look at that. i am not sure why that would be. possibly controller adding budget, but i will look into that and find out why that changed, but again, these are-these figures are the most recent updated amounts that have come in to our financial system both budget and actuals. >> so, if your fiscal year starts in september, correct? >> july. >> july, okay. >> but, in july 1, the overall budget may not have been finally approved, so the budget process-in the budget process the mayor submits her budget and the board of supervisors can make changes and cuts and adds, so that process is usually not

completed by july 1, so what will be louded in the budget is what the mayor proposed and when the supervisors finally approve the final budget any differences will be added so it can change after that and then any mid-year transfers or if we-we have the ability to move budget and from category to category or other departments if other departments are funding work or we give our continuing project funds to other budget to other departments to perform work for us so there are changes. we could show the original budget and then revised budget so you would be aware of any changes that have been made throughout the year to the budget. >> i think that would be helpful. again, i think it just looking at the numbers in context of other numbers that have been-

>> sure. >> assumed or projected and what you are tracking that against. >> sure. >> i'm asking questions not picking on you because i know you just started your job but i want to understand how these numbers come about. commissioner- >> i was going to make a suggestion that maybe we could as a commission go through how budgets work and the 101 of budget. i think that would be helpful moving forward our work. >> sure. i would be happy to put together a presentation about how the budget process works, finances work, timing of everything, year end close, the sources of data we use. it is quite voluminous so i have ideas for claimpging this presentation. there wasn't time to change the format from the old one, but i will try to come up with something that is not completely overwhelming but shows

the information that you're interested in. >> we don't need mba in accounting, we just want to understand the numbers in layman terms. the way i understand things and as a project manager i have to track my budget but i compare against something else to see how my project is track. i am using it in a world that i understand so other people may use it differently. i just are think that the commission needs context to understand how when you are giving us a snapshot of something on a monthly basis how that compares to what is projected and that may mean for 2 years but we want to know how that compares over a 2 year span if that is tracking. and also things are changing because this is all based on applications and permits coming in that are going to modulate or adjustments have to be made for that. but i

think that having something that gives us a little more background would be helpful. >> sure. i'll work on that. >> thank you. >> any public comment on the director's report items a-e? >> good morning, my name is jerry (inaudible) i want to commend for a very enlightening discussion on dbi long-term financial challenges and the role prior year surpluses. i suggest dbi prepare a simple schedule that shows the current surplus balance and how it has been committed in future years and the ending balance that is available. earlier in the year dbi took about $27 million of prior year reserves and booked it as current revenue. it is incorrect to record the use of prior year

reserves as current year revenue, because it is confusing. non current items like taking prior reserves should be a non operating item. this perhaps is one reason why the current financial statements are confusing. issuing a financial report that compares the current year actual with prior year actual could be useful. this would give the reader a good sense how the current year is tracking against last year. measuring the current year against both budget and last year would be helpful. i'm a retired cfo and trying to help, thank you. >> thank you. up next is item 5 is general public comment. take public comment on matters within the commission jurisdiction not part of this agenda.

>> thank you commissioners. director o'riordan. james heron a architect and 40 year resident of this great city. i hope to draw your attention to a serious flaw in the housing code which seems written all most explicitty to reduce accessibility potentially effecting hundreds of senior and are disabled residents. the curpt building code requires new apartment buildings 3 stories or higher with a certain minimum floor area to have a compliant elevator consistent with the ada. the housing code however seems to suggest that only elevator buildings 5 stories or more are required to maintain those elevators. for 4 story or lower elevator buildings built before the new code if your elevator breaks down maintenance is not required. this does not seem to mesh well with san francisco 40 foot height limit. my wife and i live in precisely such a elevator building 4

stories, 2 bedroom units at 2960 polk street. i have mobility issues and the building always had working elevator. the owners began a modernization project. work started on schedule but after several mujt months we were (inaudible) return the elevator in working order. we filed complaint with housing inspection service, director order of abatement issued only to have the owner lawyer successfully appeal the order of abatement. i can only wonder how many other 4 story elevator buildings in san francisco have already or will meet the same fate becoming a undue financial burden. this wait against the physical ly daily burdens stuck on the 4th floor without a elevator forced to lift grocery luggage laundry one step at a

time. we continue to explore ways to encourage the owner tuesday do the right thing and mean while hope the commission will work to fix this easily corrected flaw in the housing code. as a architect i spent fair amount of time looking at codes and i can say that the codes governing elevator seem to be very spotty possibly they were structured at a time when elevators were a novel luxury and the codes treated them as such concerned more with safety then access. times have changed, accessibility is no longer just a luxury and these codes need to be revised. thank you very much. >> thank you. is there additional public comment? put it on the overhead if you like.

>> (inaudible) >> you can try it. maybe it was suggested speaking on what it is you are showing. in addition mr. dratler did submit-e-mailed his public comment to the commission in advance of the meeting. >> thank you. i'm ready. good morning my name is jerry

dratler and sent two examples of expired building permits through administrative permits to demonstrate the abuse of the permitting process by dbi. 418 congo street and 55 fulton street are the examples. the april 20, 2022 meeting agenda meeting 10 was a update by joe duffy on scope and implementation plan for dbi internal quality control audit bernie kernen and rod rigo (inaudible) led by ed dawnally. mission local ran a story october 10, 2022 that reported ed dawnally worked on the house. one subject of the audit. mentions mr. santose is listed as engineer on 4 individual building permits and mr. santose submitted two sets of engineering plan for the remodel. the schedule on the

screen shows 8 building permits issued to mr. donally home. ed donally allowed 6 building permits for $179 thousand to expire. why would a experienced building inspector let 6 building permits expire? dbi issued two admen strative permits for 1 dollar each to final the work on the 6 expired building permits. ed donally finalized the 2006-7 building permit 12 years after on 2019 administrative permit approved and inspected by senior building inspector kevin (inaudible) dbi should have required ed donally to renew the original building permits and final the original building permits. why does dbi allow expired building permits to be finaled through administrative permits? 55 fulton street is a example of

dbi misuse of administrative permits. a permit should not have been issued to finalize the open $48 million building permit from 2013. why did senior inspector mc cue approve administrative permit to finalize the building permit open? when the building permit issued march 26, 2014 and still open. 55 fulton has been the highly visible for both reporting operational (inaudible) what is lessen learned from the two examples? dbi should not use administrative permits to final building permits. thank you. >> thank you. just wanted to acknowledge that the previous

speaker for public comment mr. heron the commission received an e-mail with documents from him prior to the meeting as well. is there any remote public comment? seeing none, we are on to item 6. nomination subcommittee. 6a, update from the nomination subcommittee. >> commissioner sommers. >> hello. the nomination subcommittee which consist of commissioner tam and myself met tuesday november 8 and discussed the updates to our mostly updates to vacant positions on the different commissions and committees we oversee, and also continuing vacant positions on these different

bodies. do you want to go to b? >> okay. thank you. as commissioner sommer mentioned the subcommittee reviewed the various vacancies and decided on a few members for appointment. the members seeking apountment are daniel sullivan. randy collins. david kane, licensed structural engineer specialize in seismic improvement and the seat that remains vacant and have not received applications is tenant lice nsh architect or engineer oand there is also licensed contractor-another vacancy for licensed contractor. the subcommittee recommended to appoint mr. daniel sullivan

randy collins and david kane. is there a motion for to approve? >> may i-sorry, didn't- >> sure, go ahead. >> i was going to mention to our commission here, the people who are seeking appointment-we did an announcement we ran for september and october for 4 open positions on-this is board of examiners. we received applications-is daniel sullivan here? he submitted application for building owner representative seat. a life long san francisco resident and former firefighter for 26 years in san francisco, correct? thank you. and apparently owns a building. excellent. so he submitted for that position so i want to acknowledge briefly the different people sitting here. randy collins is in the back and he-thank you for coming randy. he is currently sits on the board of

examiner in the license structural engineer seat specializing in seismic improvement and request to move to the open license engineer seat. he is small business owner and structural engineering firm and owned his business 20 years. the third person who applied for board of examiners is david kane. he is also a licensed structural engineer and are applied for the position for license structural engineer specializing in seismic improvements. he also owns or coowns his own firm for the last 12 years in san francisco and yes are, those are the three people who are seeking appointment to board of examiners. is there any questions, discussion? >> any questions? i like to thank the candidates for answering the call to service as well. with that said, i like to move to appoint the candidates for the

positions on the boe. >> we have a motion to appoint the candidates mentioned. is there a second? >> second. >> there is a motion and second. is there any public comment on this motion? seeing none, i'll do a roll call vote on the motion to approve the candidates. [roll call] >> the motion carries unanimously. congratulations members. [applause] >> thank you. >> any of the members in attendance could you come up to the

podium, please and we'll do the oath of office for mr. sullivan, mr. collins and mr. kane. if you could raise your right hand and repeat after me. i, state your name--do solemnly swear or affirm, that i will support and are defend the constitution, of the united states, and the constitution of the state of california, against all enomies foreign and domestic. that i will bear true faith and allegiance, to the constitution of the united states, and the constitution of the state of california. that i

take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation, or purpose of evasion, and that i will well and faithfully discharge, the duties upon which i'm about to enter. and during such time, as i hold the office of a member of the board of examiners. congratulations again. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. >> you have any words? you can say something if you like or don't have to. >> i really appreciate this opportunity to serve and like to thank everyone for giving me this opportunity. i look forward working with the commission and fellow board members. thank you. >> thank you. >> i think commissioner wants to personally thank mr. sullivan mr. cauline and mr. kane for

making the effort to come in person to get sworn in and we want to thank you for your service. always pleasant to see people in person. especially the last few months. commissioners tam and commissioner sommer. >> i think we all echo (inaudible) just to put it out there we still have vacancies so if you are out there, i encourage you to answer the call to service. >> thank you. next we have item c, which is review and possible action to make recommendations to the building inspection commission regarding appointment to the code advisory committee. term to expire august 10, 2025 and member seeking appointment john tostanoski mechanical engineer contractor seat and we have one seat that remains vacant and have not received applications for a person qualified

in the area of historical preservation, if there is anyone listening interested in that. committee members have comment on this item? >> similar to the last item, this is the code advisory committee. we sent an announcement on the same announcement as the board of examiners announcement that was seeking to fill two positions. we have the middle 4-application for one position. this is by john tostanoski seeking the mechanical engineer contractor seat. john, are you in the audience? hi, john. and john now is a general contractor who owns his own firm for the past 2 years and before that served for about 15 years in the trades doing mechanical contracting work. so, we spoke with john and he joined us at the last meeting and like to

recommend his appointment to the code advisory committee to serve in that role. also we did not receive applications yet for a person qualified in the area of historic preservation so with this vacancy and the vacancies still on the previous item the board of examiners will likely do a new announcement and reissue it to see if we can do targeted outreach to get applicants for those positions. but i think the item at hand is a recommendation to appoint mr. tostanoski. >> is there a motion? >> motion to reappoint. >> seconded. >> there is a motion and a second to appoint mr. tostanoski for this mechanical engineer contractor seat. is there any public comment on this motion? seeing none,

i will then do a roll call vote. [roll call] that motion carries unanimously. congratulations and mr. tostanoski, you can come forward. [applause] repeat the oath of office. [swearing in]

>> thank you. congratulations. >> thank you. [applause] >> there is. i forgot to change it. next we have one more. we

have item d. review and possible action to make recommendations to the building inspection commission regarding reapoinltment to the access appeals commission. term expire november 1, 2026. and the members seeking reappointment are kevin birmingham and arnie lerner. kevin birmingham is public member seat and arnie lerner are person experienced in construction. i believe they are attending remotely, so if we can unmute them. >> thank you. >> we issued an announcement earlier this month november 4 for a seat that has just opened on this 5 person commission. there is a open seat now for a person experienced in construction, so that announcement is being circulated. applications requesting them by december 2 for someone who wishes to sit on

that commission. the two members that sonya noted are seeking reappointment so currently sit on the commission. they have expressed interest renewing their seat on that group so that as you said sonya, kevin birmingham and arnie lerner. i know lerner called in. did kevin call in as well? >> yes, both attending remotely. >> i think our recommendation is to reappoint those two members, and- >> motion to reappoint. >> second. >> there is a motion to reappoint both members birmingham and lerner and second. is there any public comment on this motion? seeing none, i will do a roll call vote. also for the record commissioner alexander left the meeting now.

[roll call] >> motion carries unanimously. congratulations on the appointment. [applause] mr. birmingham and lerner, just repeat the oath of office after me. [oath of office]

>> congratulations and thank you. [applause] did either of you have any comment? >> just happy and glad to be able to a public service and to use my experience to help the community. >> thank you. >> thank you everyone. >> thank you very much. >> thank you gentleman. >> next we will go on to item 7. discussion and possible action to appoint commissioners to serve on the nominations subcommittee. we currently only have two members. great if we had three because that is how the committee is made up, so we are trying to see if any other commissioners would be interested in serving on this. >> i like to say a couple of words. i like to thank commissioner sommer and commissioner tam for their

participation in the nomination committee. it is a commission-a subcommittee that doesn't necessarily require a lot of time commitment, but any additional responsibility is always you know, added responsibility when you have many other things you are taking care of in your life. the work you have done this past year, i applaud because i was on it (inaudible) wasn't sure what how much time and effort it would require or how much you needed to participate, but i have seen on linked in commissioner sommer promoting the vacant seats, so i think it is just great work that you have done this past year. that being said, i think that the two commissioners who are on the subcommittee would encourage commissioner

(inaudible) commissioner newman, are you up for it? >> it varies and it is really only as needed. they had to meet more frequently recently because of the term expiration dates but it isn't a huge time commitment and it is probably mostly twice a year. 2- 4 times a year. [applause] >> yea! >> thank you. we will have- >> that wasn't peer pressure. >> thank you. we'll have a motion then to nominate commissioner newman as part of the nomination subcommittee. >> i make a motion to nominate commissioner neumann to the nomination subcommittee. >> second. >> motion and second. any public comment on this motion? seeing none, do the roll call

vote. [roll call] >> the motion carries unanimously. congratulations. [applause] thank you. next we have item 8 which update from the code advisory committee. >> good morning president bito and commissioners. i am steve harris, chair of the code advisory committee. you asked for a update as to wat we have been doing the last couple years so just here to summarize that for you. here is-we can go to the second slide. the code advisory committee is defined and created in the building code and the purpose of the committee is to advice

bic on items related to the building code. we have 17 positions and one is currently still vacant as you are well aware. a lot of the work that goes on in the code advisory committee occurs in the subcommittees. we have several subcommittees including one that covers administrative and general design and disability access. one relating to housing. one relating to green building issues. one combined subcommittee on mep and fire, which i hope you will be joining, and one on structural issues of which i'm also the chair. things we do involve-give me a second. double sided page thing isn't very

good. the things we do include-here we go. we do have monthly meetings. they don't occur every month but in 2020 we had 5 meetings. in 2021 there were 7. this year 2022, 8 to date. a little more then normal because of the change in the code and that's required quite a bit of extra effort on the part of the committee. the issues that we addressed and discussed include looking at proposed ordinance, various proposed ordinance, updates to the code which as i said this year is more significant because of the 3 year code cycle. we look at changes to and new administrative bulletins and information sheets. we hear updates from staff on various programs and a few

other things. starting with the proposed ordinances, we did look at the all electric ordinance which was a pretty big deal for the city, as well as a prohibition on removal of kitchens in group housing. then with regard to administrative bulletins and-sorry, these are in the wrong order. that's the problem. code updates, the presentation is in the right order, just the pages in the wrong order. code updates we looked at a lot of code updates this year including the existing building code section 50643 which had been incorrectly changed in the previous code cycle. also, we looked at section 327 about lead based paint. we looked at

updates on the 3 year cycle to all the san francisco codes. the building code, the existing building code, housing code, mechanical electrical plumbing code and green building code. we looked at building codes section 106a32 and (inaudible) stamping requirements and electronic plan review. we looked at but did not finish looking at mechanical code 308.2 about outside air conditioning units as well as addressing at the last meeting changes to priority permit processing. we also looked at administrative bulletins. information sheets, and other discussions. we looked at abo93

implementation of green building requirements and spent quite a bit of time on ab111, which had to do with preparation of geo technical and earthquake ground motion reports for foundation design of tall buildings. we looked at ab112 for mixed fuel new construction companion to all electric ordinance. information sheet po5 protecting utility lines traversing new foundations. that was something that was as a result of some questions regarding the soft story program. and we looked at ego2 emergency escape and rescue openings that we worked quite closely with members of the fire department. program updates, we did get several updates on the accessible building interest program and been getting those every other month or

so as well as recently on the concrete building safety program which is something which is chugging through the process we hope will result in new requirements in the not too distant future. and lastly, we did look at a few other items. should be able to find these here. i don't know what page they are on. we looked at information sheet on gender neutral restrooms and also changes in occupancy types and occupant loads that we ended up putting aside. we certainly talked about permitting processes and also collection design guidelines. we had discussion about the shared spaces program actually a couple discussions until we decided that really was not part of our-not within our auspice even though a lot of members had concerns about it. we

also discussed oversight issues with regard to the soft story program. and that's what we have been up to the last couple years. i will take any of your questions if you have any. >> thank you for the presentation. commissioners, do you have questions? >> mr. harris, i didn't realize you are in the audience so would have said hello. it is nice to finally meet you in person. i was just telling commissioner sommer that i had this meeting on my calendar for the last few months and have been unable to attend much to my frustration because of other things that have come up, so it was great to hear this update from you just to see what you have been doing this past year. commissioner sommer. >> thank you. i requested this item on the agenda after tom fesler the secretary for this group had presented a list at one of the meetings a

excel spreadsheet with a running list of all the things the group talked about and thought it was a great list that you talked about a lot of things and done a lot of-had a lot of helpful discussion so i thought it would be helpful to hear about it at this group so thank you so much for coming to say that-to update us on all that. >> (inaudible) >> yes are. i enjoyed attending them and just want to say also thank you for your services. you chair this committee and structural subcommittee. it is a sizable time commitment. i also think you do a really great job hosting, being the leader of those groups. i think it is really nice to see the way i feel you are very inclusive in terms of your request for participation allowing people to provide opinions and have meaningful discussions. i think your demeanor is really helpful and your opinions are really insightful and i feel it is a really good group that gets some good discussion going and provides the

building inspection commission with helpful recommendations and opinions, so thank you for your service, thank you for your update. >> you're welcome and thank you for all the compliments. >> i have one more question. one of the items you had on your list was dbi permitting process. i wasn't at a meeting where that was discussed, but is that something that is going to be on the agenda in the future i would be very interested attending the meeting and making sure i could attend that meeting. is that something in your future agenda you continue-a lot of these items that you have listed are things that you until they come to resolution continue to track and i would presume like the permitting process is one you continually have to sort of discuss based on these new codes that you are evaluating or deliberating about. >> normally most of the items that end up on the agenda and in front of our committee

are handed to us. we don't have a whole lot of things that bubble up through the committee ourselves and so when we discuss permanent processes that is because the bic directed it or staff directed that they need some guidance and so certainly it it possible and likely we will be discussing processes in the future and we'll make sure that you are well aware that is on the agenda so you can attend those meetings. >> happy to broach it at the next meeting that and i attend. thank you very much. >> okay. great. thank you. >> seeing none, we will go on to next item will be item 9. discussion and possible action regarding proposed changes to administrative

bulletin ab-004 priority permitting processing guidelines. >> good morning president bito and members of the commission. my name is janey chan, manager of technical services at the department of building inspections. here to present today the proposed changes of administrative bulletin 004. one of the administrative bulletins discussed in the code advisory committee. thank you steve for heading all those discussions. so as you may know administrative bulletin 004 is priority permit processing guideline and it generally prioritize s permitting for projects other then

the normal first come first serve guidelines. it helps prioritize permitting for projects that are emergency safety projects for safety or mandatory program projects such as seismic safety or (inaudible) it was last updated back in 2015 and so it is due time to revisit this. so some of the proposed updates of administrative bulletin are to remove requirement for projects to meet high standard for efficiency such as green building or leed. the reason for that is because a lot of the code requirements have caught up to a lot of these high standard for efficiency and so we dont see a need for

pointing that out anymore. updates also include to projects that are seeking approval under the home sf ordinance. we like to come in line with the planning department priority processing and that one of the major changes that would occur if this were to be accepted is that the planning department's home sf ordinance includes priority permitting or processing for homes with 30-buildings with 30 percent affordable housing, whereas previously this administrative bulletin would require hundred percent affordable housing. additional updates include adding accessory dwelling units and junior

accessory dwelling units to align with the state initiatives, so those would be prioritized as well, and we also like to add tell telecommunication facilities such as cell towers and antennas and that is also in line with state initiatives. we also like to add renewable energy projects such as ev charging stations, solar, thermal wind power generation. those type of projects. that pretty much summarizes the proposed changing to the administrative bulletin. any questions? >> thank you. is there public comment and then go to the commissioner questions? public comment on this item? any remote? seeing none, commissioners you have any questions? >> commissioner neumann i believe has a question. >> it is a change in prioritization from hundred percent affordable to 30 percent affordable.

that is not far off from what just required in multifamily development. how did you arrive at that number? >> that number is to match that of the planning department ordinance. it just made sense to you know, not require more then what the planning department is requiring. >> you are saying it was hundred percent affordable before and now it is reduced to 30 percent? >> yes. >> how is hundred percent affordable before process then? i guess if you reducing it, what was done before when the bulletin included hundred percent affordable that that was a requirement, correct? >> in order to meet the prioritization, correct. if somebody propose hundred percent affordable housing project that

would qualify ify-the project would qualify to be prioritized. and now to match that of planning ordinance, it is 30 percent instead of hundred. >> do you want to add anything to that? >> no, i just really wanted to understand what the thinking was behind that but alignment with planning does make sense as far as trying to sync those processes and i understand there is a lot that is out of step between the two and so it makes sense. i would like to see priority for hundred percent affordable rather then just the inclusionary number. >> uh-huh. >> if i may--sorry. and

>> go ahead deputy director neville. >> good morning president bito, members of commission. i want to underscore the mayoral legislative priority for hundred percent projects is still in this administrative bulletin. (inaudible) the addition of the home sf project was just to bring into alignment with the planning department. it doesn't make sense one department prioritized a project and other departments don't. this would just streamline the process and make sure the (inaudible) carry to the whole development review process we carry that priority all the way through. >> thank you. >> commissioner sommer, you had a question.

>> yes. the proposed changes were to add things to the list of projects that can be prioritized. that didn't-did it also-did it show what was already on the list that is not changing? >> that isn't included in the slide. >> are there other projects that are eligible that we didn't talk about today? >> yeah. so, there are projects that--they are all related to the for example the high efficiency standards for buildings. what else is there? it list specifically the mandatory program projects. there are-i have to bring up the

document. administrative bulletin. >> ab004. that was on the slide. i was asking what other things are included in here because my follow-up question is and this is something mr. harris mentioned i don't fully remember the answer and curious how many-what is the percentage of permit-if you are one of the projects my understanding is you do not automatically get enrolled in the prioritization process, you have to apply, right? you have to do something extra to be prioritized. how many of the total number of permit applicants, how many get in the pritor phraigz list? >> i don't have the number off the top of my head but we can look that up for you. >> just curious the

effectiveness in terms of-i don't think i take issue with this, just curious. if 75 percent of projects are prioritized is that really a prioritization? just curious. exactly. >> (inaudible) >> yes, right. right. >> really as neville just said, this is based on alignment with the ordinance relating to home sf projects that is currently in place, and i are think it makes sense to be in alignment with the legislative ordinance that planning already has in place. what are we prioritizing? prioritizing anything that is a emergency. we look at physical infrastructure projects, which is why we are speaking about the antennas and so forth. in addition to that i think it makes sense to think about

having less of these leed type projects, because the code has kind of caught up to that like jenny said. really that's it from my perspective. >> i think that the information and questions and responses are all very logical in terms of-speaking specifically to that affordable housing. my only reservation is i wish that we had commissioner tut available to speak to this because think commissioner tut and neumann they would have had their input so that is my only reservation about this item. >> thank you. also the apologies for not having it in the packet here but there was the code advisory

committee recommended approval of the adsmin strative bulletin and did include a letter stating that. need a motion to approve this. >> do we actually approve this or do we recommend it? who is in charge of approving? >> typically there is the way the administrative bulletins are done similar to legislation it is just it doesn't go to the board of supervisors but the process is similar but within the department. administrative bulletins are just generated by dbi. >> i think (inaudible) was going to say something. could you finish? >> i have the administrative bulletin from other projects that would be prioritized are permit applications for (inaudible) of disabled access improvements. solar vol tayic projects.

historic building projects. there is a list of them if interested it is on the website as well. >> thank you. >> like to make a motion to approve the bulletin. >> there is a motion is there a second? >> second. >> is there any public comment on the motion? is there any remotely? seeing none, i'll do a roll call vote on the item. [roll call] >> the motion carries unanimously. thank you. >> thank you. >> next item then is

item 10 update regarding the status of department of building inspection 5 year strategic plan. >> hello commissioners. thank you for the opportunity to speak today. patrick han the communication director for the department of building inspection. here to present on the 5 year strategic plan and give a update where we are. go to the next slide, please. the goal of the 5 year strategic plan is to prioritize coordinate dbi work streams to establish and achieve goals reflect organizational values and provide high quality customer service to customers and the public. strat agency to get there is engage in experience facilitator to work with the executive team to update our 5 year strategic plan again to reflect the new vision and values

of management. we also want to develop help dbi deploy operational infrastructure to insure successful implementation. next slide, please. the outcome of the request for proposal will be 5 year strategic plan featuring the goals strategy tactical initiative and resource requirements in one comprehensive document and also operational tools to prioritize coordinate implement measure and review the strategic plan and progress making towards our goals. next slide, please. the request for proposal has two components. the first one is strategic plan. that includes executive summary of the plan so everyone has a clear north star to know what we are try toog do. the second part is comprehensive detailed plan articulating the vision mission 5 year goal strategies measurable objectives tactics and timelines for implementation. next slide, please. the big thing about strategic plan a lot

get a lot of efforts is put into creating them and they are put on a very important shelf and never get touched again. sometimes people revisit every couple years but ontime the strategy and tactics used are not able to be deployed because they are complicated so we want to make sure we have the infrastructure in place to make sure we can operationalize the plan and it is able to be used to guide our work on a daily monthly and yearly basis. we want to develop tools and processed including executive summary how the plan will work, project prioritization coordination process, strategy and tactic tracking tool. way to identify barriers and resolve them. staff feedback because the information in the plan has to go through staff and we want to get feedback to make sure people doing the work on the ground are providing insight and advice to help improve. the final thing is accountability tools and processes. we want it know who is

leading the project and make sure we have a way to measure progress and hold accountable to make sure they deliver on what they have been assigned. the request for proposal now has been drafted and reviewed by the various different city agencies including civil service and city contractor. january we'll publish the rfp, host a premeeting and answer questions. april evaluate the rfp and do a interview process. the participant leading the interview process are (inaudible) permit services administration manager carrie (inaudible) compliance manager chris (inaudible) in may award a contract and june begin the process. we expect to last about 6 months and wrap up in january of 2024. happy to answer questions and assure we will come back and keep you informed and involved as we move through the process.

>> does anybody have any questions on the commission? >> have you identified your consultant or what process are you using to select that consultant? >> we are using a full city request for proposal process, so it will take a little more time is we want to recognize often times people are hired for the first part. create a plan and we believe we have a lot of components in place. patrick is clear what the values are, how to engage with the executive team to move the department forward and we feel we need help coordinating and aligning and prioritizing that part of it but deis implementation to make sure we have the tool s and means to effectively lead the organization forward utilizing the strategic plan to make sure we are prioritizing and operating and executing as intended. >> any other questions? i have a couple questions. the operational tool that you outlined here, are

those tools and processes the consultant is going to help create and implement? >> that is the idea, correct. >> last question i have is that on the timeline you provide where you would publish that in a year could we get updates based on a time line? for instance, december just a brief update on who might have been selected for this or you are publishing the rfp. sorry. >> happy to come back in january. >> yes are. >> to come back once we have a more narrow group. i don't know how much we can tell in the candidate process. because i help develop the rfp i can't participate in the process so there are fairly tight controls but happy to give a update in january and keep informed. this is as much your plan as it is ours. >> i think that would be great. i think in january when you publish it because

that is public record. and then in april when you select a candidate, i think that can be a time when you can provide a update as well because i don't think you can provide us a updates when you are in the process. >> i think that is right but that sounds good. >> okay. when you award it, june you have the process started and then we'll consider after june other updates that might be appropriate. >> sounds good. >> thank you. >> thank you guys. >> thank you. any public comment on the item? >> good morning, jerry dratler. mr. hanen 5 year plan focuses on a department focused 5 year plan. should the bic provide input on items they like addressed in the 5 year plan, should the public put items on the list they would like to see in the 5 year plan? i know i

have a few suggestions i like to make to the 5 year plan. for example, comprehensive business process analysis of dbi. the last one was conducted in 2007 and only resulted in 189 recommendations most of which were never implemented. thank you. >> any additional public comment? seeing none, we will go to item 11. >> madam secretary, could i make a suggestion that we are approaching all most quarter past 11, and we still have to get through any other public comment plus review the meeting minutes. i don't want to be too rushed. >> okay. >> so, i would like to make a motion to move the fee study and

update to client services to december if that's okay with my fellow commissioners. >> i second that motion. >> there is a motion by president bito and seconded by vice president tam to continue item 11 and 12 to the december meeting. >> so, we could get to 13 briefly and then 14 i don't believe that will take a lot of time to approve the minutes. >> okay. there is a motion and second. there any public comment on the motion? are all commissioners in favor? any opposed? motion carriesue unanimously. are we to 13 now? >> yes. >> item 13 is commissioner questions and matters. 13a, inquiries to staff at this time

commissioners may make inquiries to staff regarding various documents policy practice and procedures which are of interest to the commission. >> did you do a and b at the same time? >> sure. item b, future meetings and agendas at this time the commission may discuss and take action to set the date of special meeting and or determine those items that could be placed on thugenda of the next meeting and other future meetings of inbuilding inspection commission. the next scheduled meeting is december 21. >> i generally posed a lot of questions focused on the budget and made my request for that, but i would like that to be included in the next agenda and maybe the format of the president report on the budget could be for matted differently, or potentially have a separate agenda item if we need to outside

of that budget update or finances to lay out how dbi budget are created and how they balance it and what that looks like on two year horizon. i don't have any other questions or suggestions for agenda. >> any other commissioners have any suggestions for agenda items? if not today you can reach out to me prior to the next meeting. there may be discussion regarding potentially changing the meeting date, but we'll reach out to everyone on that. that's item 13a and b. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, item 14 is review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of october 19, 2022. >> motion to prove

approve the minutes. >> second. >> motion and second to approve the minutes. is there any public comment? seeing none, are all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> any opposed? thank you. the minutes are approved. and then we have item 15, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn. >> madam chair. just real quick, i know the holidays are upon us and i just want to wish everybody a happy thanks giving. thankful for being able to serve with all my commissioners here and thankful for the staff and director at dbi, sonya monique and everybody else so want to wish everybody a happy holiday before we adjourn. >> thank you commissioner tam. i can always rely on you to remind us that we are still even (inaudible) to remind ourselves to greet everybody happy holidays as well so thank you for keeping us on point with that.

>> motion to adjourn. >> second. happy holidays everybody. >> thank you all commissioners in favor? >> aye. >> we are now adjourned. it is 11:16 a.m. thank you. [meeting adjourned]

>> in august 2019 construction began on the new facility at 1995 evans avenue in bayview. it will house motorcycle police and department of forensic services division. both sfpd groups are in two buildings that need to be vacated. they will join the new $183 million facility in late 2021. >> elements of the cfi and the traffic company are housed at the hall of justice, which has been determined to be seismically unfit. it is slated for demolition. in addition to that the forensic services crime lab is also slated for demolition. it was time and made sense to put these elements currently

spread in different parts of the city together into a new facility. >> the project is located in the bayview area, in the area near estes creek. when san francisco was first formed and the streetcars were built back it was part of the bay. we had to move the building as close to the edge as possible on bedrock and solid elements piles down to make sure it was secure. >> it will be approximately 100,000 square feet, that includes 8,000 square feet for traffic company parking garage. >> the reason we needed too new building, this is inadequate for the current staffing needs and also our motor department. the officers need more room, secured parking. so the csi unit location is at the hall of justice, and the crime laboratory is located at building 60 sixty old hunters

point shipyard. >> not co-located doesn't allow for easy exchange of information to occur. >> traffic division was started in 1909. they were motor officers. they used sidecars. officers who road by themselves without the sidecar were called solo. that is a common term for the motorcycle officers. we have 45 officers assigned to the motorcycles. all parking at the new facility will be in one location. the current locker room with shared with other officers. it is not assigned to just traffic companies. there are two showers downstairs and up. both are gym and shop weres are old. it needs constant maintenance. >> forensic services provides

five major types of testing. we develop fingerprints on substances and comparisons. there are firearms identification to deal with projectiles, bullets or cartridge casings from shootings. dna is looking at a whole an rare of evidence from -- array of evidence from dna to sexual assault to homicide. we are also in the business of doing breath allyzer analysis for dui cases. we are resurrecting the gunshot residue testing to look for the presence of gunshot residue. lifespan is 50 years. >> it has been raised up high

enough that if the bay starts to rise that building will operate. the facility is versus sustainable. if the lead gold highest. the lighting is led. gives them good lights and reduces energy use way down. water throughout the project we have low water use facilities. gardens outside, same thing, low water use for that. other things we have are green roofs on the project. we have studies to make sure we have maximum daylight to bring it into the building. >> the new facility will not be open to the public. there will be a lobby. there will be a deconstruction motorcycle and have parts around. >> the dna labs will have a vestibule before you go to the space you are making sure the air is clean, people are coming in and you are not contaminating

anything in the labs. >> test firing in the building you are generating lead and chemicals. we want to quickly remove that from the individuals who are working in that environment and ensure what we put in the air is not toxic. there are scrubbers in the air to ensure any air coming out is also at the cleanest standards. >> you will see that kind of at the site. it has three buildings on the site. one is for the motorcycle parking, main building and back behind is a smaller building for evidence vehicles. there is a crime, crime scene. they are put into the secure facility that locks the cars down while they are examined. >> they could be vehicles involved in the shooting. there might be projectiles lodged in the vehicle, cartridge casings inside the vehicle, it could be a vehicle where a

aggravated sexual occurred and there might be biological evidence, fingerprints, recovered merchandise from a potential robbery or other things. >> the greatest challenge on the project is meeting the scope requirements of the project given the superheated construction market we have been facing. i am proud to say we are delivering a project where we are on budget. >> the front plaza on the corner will be inviting to the public. something that gives back to the public. the building sits off the edge. it helps it be protected. >> what we are looking for is an updated building, with facilities to meet our unit's needs. >> working with the san francisco police department is an honor and privilege. i am looking forward to seeing

their faces as the police officers move to the new facility. >> it is a welcome change, a new surrounding that is free from all of the challenges that we face with being remote, and then the ability to offer new expanded services to the city and police department investigations unit. i can't wait until fall of 2021 when the building is finally ready to go and be occupied and the people can get into the facility to serve them and serve the community.

>> driver, bye. >> hi. i'm will b. mixture weltake a walk with me. >> i just love taking strolls in san francisco. they are so many cool and exciting things to see. like -- what is that there? what is that for? hi. buddy. how are you. >> what is that for. >> i'm firefighter with the san francisco fire department havings a great day, thank you for asking. this is a dry sand pipe. dry sand pipes are multilevel building in san francisco and the world. they are a piping system to facilitate the fire engineaire

ability to pump water in a buildings that is on fire. >> a fire truck shows up and does what? >> the fire engine will pull up to the upon front of the building do, spotting the building. you get an engine in the area that is safe. firefighters then take the hose lyoning line it a hydrant and that give us an endsless supply of water. >> wow, cool. i don't see water, where does it come from and where does it go? >> the firefighters take a hose from the fire engine to the dry sand pipe and plug it in this inlet. they are able to adjust the pressure of water going in the inlet. to facilitate the pressure needed for any one of the floors on this building. firefighters take the hose bunked and he will take that homes upon bundle to the floor

the fire is on. plug it into similar to this an outlet and they have water to put the fire out. it is a cool system that we see in a lot of buildings. i personal low use federal on multiple fires in san francisco to safely put a fire out. >> i thought that was a great question that is cool of you to ask. have a great day and nice meeting you. >> thank you for letting us know what that is for. thanks, everybody for watching! bye! [music] [♪♪♪]

>> my family's starts in mexico

in a small town. my parents are from a very, very small town. so small, that my dad's brother is married to one of my mom's sisters. it's that small. a lot of folks from that town are here in the city. like most immigrant families, my parents wanted a better life for us. my dad came out here first. i think i was almost two-years-old when he sent for us. my mom and myself came out here. we moved to san francisco early on. in the mission district and moved out to daily city and bounced back to san francisco. we lived across the street from the ups building. for me, when my earliest memories were the big brown trucks driving up and down the street keeping us awake at night. when i was seven-years-old and i'm in charge of making sure we get on the bus on time to get to school. i have to make sure that we do our homework. it's a lot of responsibility for a kid. the weekends were always for

family. we used to get together and whether we used to go watch a movie at the new mission theater and then afterwards going to kentucky fried chicken. that was big for us. we get kentucky fried chicken on sunday. whoa! go crazy! so for me, home is having something where you are all together. whether it's just together for dinner or whether it's together for breakfast or sharing a special moment at the holidays. whether it's thanksgiving or christmas or birthdays. that is home. being so close to berkley and oakland and san francisco, there's a line. here you don't see a line. even though you see someone that's different from you, they're equal. you've always seen that. a rainbow of colors, a ryan bow of personalities. when you think about it you are

supposed to be protecting the kids. they have dreams. they have aspirations. they have goals. and you are take that away from them. right now, the price is a hard fight. they're determined. i mean, these kids, you have to applaud them. their heart is in the right place. there's hope. i mean, out here with the things changing everyday, you just hope the next administration makes a change that makes things right. right now there's a lot of changes on a lot of different levels. the only thing you hope for is for the future of these young kids and young folks that are getting into politics to make the right move and for the folks who can't speak. >> dy mind motion. >> even though we have a lot of fighters, there's a lot of voice less folks and their voiceless because they're scared.

jury room good morning. welcome to the awning meeting. the november meeting -- of the lafco commission. i'm connie chan chair. i'm joined by fielder. mar and sairng. clerk is, lisa sa mara and like to thank the staff from sfgovtv. >> members will participate as if