■q legacy businesses are the most foundational businesses in our neighborhood corridors. they provided services and a place for community to gather for often times for generations. they are really part of the culturally fabric that makes san francisco neighborhoods so unique. >> the idea is take what i think is [indiscernible] about immigration, about belonging, about some of the amazing history of the city. [indiscernible]

>> welcome to the city and county of san francisco building inspection commission meeting this morning at 9:30 am., wednesday, november 20, 2024. the regular meeting of building inspection commission i'd like to remind everyone to mute yourself if in the speaking and next item we have is roll call. >> president alexander-tut here. >> vice president shaddix here. >> xhoiksdz here. >> commissioner meng here. >> vice president neumann here. >> xhoikts we have quorum and now we have the land acknowledgement commissioners

on the unceded ancestral homeland of the ramaytush (rah-my-toosh) ohlone (o-lon-ee) who are the original inhabitants of the san francisco peninsula. responsibilities as the caretakers of this place, as well as for all peoples who reside in their traditional territory. acknowledging the ancestors, elders, and relatives of the ramaytush ohlone community and by affirming their sovereign rights as first peoples. environment in san francisco, we are committed to supporting the traditional and contemporary evolution of the american indian community. a /* au thank you, next, we read for the members of the public the public maybe linking in the public maybe linking in code: 2660 224 2831. to raise your hand for public comment on a specific agenda item press *3 when prompted by the meeting moderator. and the meeting

meeting webx. >> remote meeting access (webex) to watch via webex application on your desktop/laptop: click the link to join the meeting - https://bit.ly/4092zfq you will then be prompted to enter the following information: access code: 2660 224 2831 webex webinar password: 1120 and next have item 2. >> 2. president's opening remarks. >> good morning um, commissioners. senior staff and members of the public. welcome to the rainy season laughing and we know this is an uptick in phone calls and complaints recognizing the our housing division will receive an uptick please call 311 in order to report those things and our inspectors are remove and we care about our wellness this is a short meeting and out of respect for the members of the public who are also present we are only focusing on legislation to have an expand ab later on this morning to deal with the

backlog and thank you for for that we'll we'll have items but only receiving the reports item 6 it is the - the reports are public and on the wetland if you have questions you may direct them to the madam secretary sonya harris and on this meeting for reports. >> as a reminder the holiday season before use it new prop b realize around enlists are more restrictive to remind yourselves of those and thank you to the department four sending out clear reminder to the folks. >> and finally closing in honor of our secretary sister

passed patterson so register is there any public comment on the remarks? remarks? >> okay. >> 3. general public comment: the bic will take public comment on matters within the commission's jurisdiction that are not part of this agenda. >> i have handouts. thank you.

>> i'm ready. thank you. >> good morning. my name is gary speaking about the right thing to do a alleyway that is a unique project the 3 unit in the picture was constructed with no dbi inspections thirty right thing to do la complaints being spruced-up and suppressed and. next slide, please. the permit building permit with no inspections and the. next slide, please. is showing the critic of coming up for peter birmingham human services agency project the next slide, please. is the names on the right thing to do alleyway notice of completion and inspector mark and peter birmingham and the next slide, please. is the mortgage deed of the in

2002 was signed by mark forms seven hundred filed with the tax commission and the income of 2 - on this unit. and the next slide, please. is two of the 3 of the last 3 warm seven hundred was filed with the itself commission as you can see i highlighted the relocation income also interesting in each of the three years acquired and disposed and the condo map is the same 3 names as discussed and commission local article in june of 2024 highlights the members of the birmingham family that work in dbi and mr. sir, is listed in the thirty compliments

sprebsz them tea mr. walls had a permit no inspection and a 12 thousand comboorm remodel permit was issued for unit 201 a expired by brent howard in 2024 which is 10 years. >> i $1 administrative position in may of 2024 to renew the 10 years old permit was approved by deputy matt green and 23i7b8d by inspector brent howard the last routine inspections i could find in 2008 (bell ringing) when is this nuisance going to stop the public is tired of it.

thank you. >> have we received in electronically i. >> could you please send that to the madam secretary and any additional general public comment? >> okay. then seeing none, we are are on are on are on are on are on city determination of equivalent facilitation, technical infeasibility, or unreasonable hardship, in addition to other requirements.

>> good morning. >> um, president alexander-tut and vice president shaddix i'm supervisor mandelman on the board of supervisors and author of this legislation and thank you, thank you for your time and thinking on my way up here 16 general manager's since i had one of the seats thank you for your services. >> the ordinance will do a few things sunset enforcement of assessable business entrance program a program that issued this commission i think your familiar and requires supporting by the small business commission the mayor's office of housing and community development i'm calling beyond the front door and third to encourage and support property owners and small business owners into

compliance with ada other seated at the table recipient this he front door and weighs annual ada and other accessibility and katie tang had the program in 2016 to push business owners to comply with federal and state laws rear yard entrance and this program has been assessable in as far as we go on which is that more than 16 thousand businesses have come into compliance and other 2 thousand have been in compliance but and - but roughly 4 thousand businesses have gone unheard from. >> now i mentioned this may be familiar with the commission you

have seen many extensions or permittees have seen experienced of enforcements for this katie tang had the extension of deadlines for submission for the checklist to extend that deadline to january one 2019 and all the other deadline and norman yee pushed this in 2020 and with the deadlines and mayor london breed pushed that back to 2022 i offered the extension in the first checklist to june throwing it out there and second back to the 31st, 2024 folks this can only go on for so long. you all support some of have noted i believe my staff brought

the last extension to the bic on may 15th of this and the number is familiar with you're not inclined to recommend any he further extensions for the per enforcement deadlines to move forward 6 thousand businesses have not complied present a choice for the disfigure one option to double down on enforcement of ab program under the originally task and that is an option don't believe the right option the problems are 3 fold one, will require allocating dbi and other cities resources to program on enforcing the a b e and charles kremenak them and enforcing against businesses and property owners any time when the city budget is through depression the

city will find the resources for the new enforcement effort and also at a time with the state is looking added our housing crisis and permitting with efficiency and again, why think recognizing this city resources is the relevant thing to have another division for this 7-year-old program. and that's especially true given a second reason which is that at least some of the businesses and property owners are are - my office has heard from dozens of small business owners notwithstanding their efforts are run into is obstacles to perform the necessary work resulting in several thousands of dollars and

the required upgrades will steady they're capacity and one owner says about cost them there is a motion and a second thousand dollars that is not a great opportunity for city and county of san francisco and third we have learned of conversations with the disability that assess at the front door is incredibly important not the only barrier for the most important barrier for the access to the members of the public and i am we needed to accompany with something different and better and challenges oewd with the mayor's office on disability and public utilities commission to talk with us and come with something better and that is the discussion with my office of starmdz and as american disabilities act and the office

of small business owner small business commission to drive the inclusivity dated october 2024 that is posted in the agenda packet the legislation before you partially implements the recommendations and little enforcement for the ab e and requiring reporting on the front door. and dbi the director o'riordan will hire and specialist inspector performing a higher level of inspection while out in the field and working to the materials to be better informed to keep the business owners informed and additionally o s d and oewd will have a best practices for accessibility and engage in campaigns to engage about the disabilities including the visible hearing and impairments

and just to be clear, suvent the ad e does for the relief property owners and business owners to comply with federal and state laws. the legislation to remove an i'd like local requirement that going above and beyond the laws the enforcement of which can present a burden to the departments pursuing a number of important priorities and budget cuts. we hope to change this narrative around that front door to refocus to the accessibility where this disabilities support of local businesses and frankly those business owners need their businesses. >> i mentioned earlier and a lot of folks working on this and a lot of departments and having those conversations i want to

thank director katie tang from the small business commission and director o'riordan and kate here and hearing from doishs and thank you, small business commission and the other the city administrators observation weighed in and many conversations with um, with the disability community particularly and thank you to johnson and others and public works that provision i want to thank schneider from public works and the attorneys had viki wong working on this from my office and spent a lot of time on this in the number of months and hear from dbi and then

kaplan from the mayor's office on disability and i apologize. i have a finance committee that meeting i have to attend and calvin will be here to answer any questions. on behalf of my office and any i'm going to turn it over to tait. okay. there we go i'm out of the way. thank you. >> thank you very much. supervisor mandelman and to be respectful of time refer to debbie kaplan to answer any questions. >> debbie kaplan are you around online somewhere? >> just a moment. >> hello. >> yes. we can hear.

>> you all right good morning, commissioners.. um, i'm debbie kaplan acting director of the mayor's office on disability and can speak to the concerns and interests of the people with disabilities. who we consulted with and addressing the issue of the future of the ad p. >> many people people with disabilities have been concerned that as um, supervisor mandelman stated that um, the a b e that is extremely has been extremely important. um, does not address many different kinds of access issues experienced by people

with different kinds of disabilities other than the mobility disabilities require the agricultureal modifications and express strong desires to support small businesses at that point in time when many small businesses are recovering from the covid epidemic and the economic fall out throughout the city caused by um, the pandemic. one of the questions or one of the challenges looking at the future of dba has been is quake on small businesses that are in buildings that are does not have

accessible front entrances and the fact that um, under the terms of many leases it is the business owner will bear the cost of these kinds of modifications rather than the owner. and apparently are state laws for that. modifying terms of leases of that nature. >> so people with disabilities that we consulted were concerned that compliance with the a b e should not harm the small businesses and many people with disabilities use as customers and as members of neighborhoods themselves. and this particular

approach um, was favored as a way to keep the focus on a variety of types of accessibility and frankly does depended on the active participation and support by small businesses in order for it to succeed. >> so we understand that um, people in the disability communities have expressed concerns that enforcement 6 ab e is sunsetted and we we are committed to having an active program that keeps the issues alive and actively under

consideration by small businesses. the grant program that the office of central nervous system operates to provide for so forth for the cost of modifications will continue and the amount of the grants will be increased. and part of the campaign will be to make sure that small businesses hear from customers with sdashlts who want businesses to take advantage of those grants and make changes necessary. um, so that's the statement of mayor's office on disability. and i welcome any questions you may have.

>> any other presenters? >> katie tang is coming up. >> katie tang. >> you're unmuted. >> here to answer any questions you may have but i've said rare to have a sponsor of a program come before you to say it's ready to have had the opportunity sunset the program. um, i want to remind everyone that even with 3 legislative continue does to the relief the property owners before the ada or any other states requirement so those obligations will continue at the front end through the communication to remind the better late than

never about they're responsibilities for the physical access improvements that they need to make as well as anything else beyond the front door wears committed to reviewing that outreach and information sharing search warrant business owners but think we're at the interesting stage especially in the state of our economy that a lot of businesses have struggling to stay open. um, in talking to businesses going forward to the - i have been both pleasantly surprised but take back by the people aware of ab e and their responsibilities at this time challenging was for them and they'd rather close rather than folk over money of the improvements i think a careful balance is needed and also want

to say we are seeing a lot more cases now where "businesses are served complaint leasers against them for accessibility and and whole host of issues that have the public has to deal with we again the this legislation is sunsetting enforcement we'll continue to address the perspectives so i'm here to answer any question but thank the people who worked with us very closely on developing the program i know some of them if in the audience and on the commission want to thank them i think really i think over the last few years done a lot of great work to to people mr. what they need to do with the ada and we're just in a transition phase i think something will be

helpful for people with a variety of disabilities so thank you very much. and i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> thank you, if that it's the end of presentation we'll have public comment on item 4. >> i'm a local architect practicing in san francisco for 27 and years and approved a b e permits we bend from the program i ask you to support the pail i do will would submit a checklist this didn't exist but the

businesses do and some of my clients paid thousands of dollars no fees to have their addresses recognized we had to produce as proof that those existed and additionally recently, we had clients receive violations for the residential addresses the city database was not correct in the last year dp w had outside the sidewalk needs to be upgraded in cases that exceeds 3 percent and the fee is 2 thousand and if you got a 6 or 10 or thirty percent slope i have 3 permits have been frozen for a year cannot spend $30,000

this is a real challenge for businesses the grant program of $10,000 i get in my personal business my office manager spent hours on the phone dealing with the application correctly and in addition we didn't release this was a thing to do we qualified for a small fraction and on top we had to register to get the check with the hair salon or a laundromat supposed to be a city vendor to get the funds that is a challenge i urge you you to repeal the program. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> commissioners my name is bob i'm a member of the board of

small businesses this man has come to us with a number of people in the organization who expressed my of the same things about the program we have owners businesses of up to 5 hundred square feet involved just 5 hundred square feet and, you know, those businesses have been going since before the differentiate before 19 hundred those places and businesses and they're just absolutely dump founded by the process and the expenses some have gone out of business i believe there are property owners in san francisco i want you to to be aware they're out there a feeling of very, very terrific concern of those businesses. i know a few have gone out of business because of it that's my comment.

thank you for your time. >> thank you. any additional - >> good morning commissioners. >> my name is arey a disable can we as well as and member of appeals the committee reviewed the changes to the - and voted 10 to fwoe to be modified to use this i'm here to ask you to do that and created as a result of fruition are drive by lawsuits in supervisor chan there is a door, too narrow the department

claims this is a problem for small businesses i understand the transfer of the costs for small businesses i perform nine hundred surveys and the overwhelmingly majority were fixing the properties and the grants and tax credits available through the appeals commission it is lot cheaper than paying 15 thousand to be dragged could federal court. >> stuck with lawsuits and they gave me the opportunity with the accessibility codes are trying to do a teaching opportunity for the commission and it is important to note the checklist was not meant to make the entrance fee which is not an old requirement and entries and

must be in compliance with 1998 with the building permit provider or prior to and worth noting thousands of responses requirement were not readily achievable effort yet none referred as required if they had dbi had record them to us, we could have found a solution for my applicants this is not dbi to inspector all at once with the directors hearing and spread out over wants an incredible number can be had. one thing that is important (bell ringing) rc ac committee around the credibility of dbi has a stake not enforcing the ordinance

undermines other programs such as a soft story upgrades and the concretes upgrades why should owners and tenants for upgrades in the departments will not enforce in closing take a look at the hearing process make that more and more focused on the real reason (bell ringing ab e is an incredible program here for any questions you might have. thank you. >> thank you. >> good morning commissioner henry with the president of the association. by the way, on the code advisory committee and the been so many applications i'm aware have to make the compliance with the ab e places

i know of three or four historically no because you, make this assessable. and then other ones where um, the building side offer and how you make that assessable. so look how about i said well, i need to get around but sometimes those buildings are existing and to make that assessable. we need to bend a little bit on that part of it and the other thing is true being said about the code advisory committee i think one person on that committee who has a store front business i believe they'll not comply with the

public library accomodation yes, a great thing or whatever but done it is time to look back we have the accessibility ab check the checklist we have to work on commercial buildings but 20 percent hardship and lastly no other place in the country that has this ab e with we're the only ones and i'm familiar with p them but across the city from chinatown to japan town to taraval the privacy don't know about. >> and that bbp i-i hope you support this ordinance. thank

you. >> thank you. >> good morning commissioners i'm walter in 1981 a program the nonprofit in san francisco funded by the city in part provided assessable affordable housing to people with disabilities and later on to seniors. slow gone i have 3.3 disabilities including heart disease. i become the director in the mayor's office on disability and we had a san francisco standard first of all, i hear the discussions about the ada the building department and you deal with somehow o san francisco building code we're a charter city we can steady the

code but that is a different mechanism a civil rights law as a ada is a back up and for an old person with disabilities this is a thing that need enforcement or guidance. the thirty thousand retail space that is, you know, an assess appeals commission on the front page i don't see the appeals commission in the decision avenue building department can be appealed with the accessibility matters whether it is - we haven't had a disabled people appeal too much assess

and thirty thousand units first of all, we're schedule to meet every two weeks ago i wrote the ordinance that created this commission in san francisco we didn't need - we work together the wrinkles but went 17 months after covid not a single case was forward to the appeals commission i talked to commissioner mandelman you guys don't meet we meet every time after 17 months and (bell ringing) presented to the building department and are not a bottleneck but a solution. and back to the 6 hundred and 46 thousand square feet retail space not required a square foot

retail space to spend $30,000 on assessment. when, of course, we yes must have a level (bell ringing) form they front door and never required that the sidewalk be resurfaced. >> excuse me - >> if you can wrap up your comments. >> i want a few minutes with your permission this is an important issue and haven't heard from the disability do. >> no order to grant um - let me say any questions from the commissioners to the speaker? >> in the access commissions. >> it was created because two

disabled members per law and construction in one public person unlike the appeals and others we have a special key in this and member this is act architect and so knows about this we require this someone submit an application usually the owner of the business shows up and sometimes a lawyer or representative and oftentimes the architect and say our total income one employee we can't afford to do this and we often suggest something that will work and we can say for a second floor hair salon put a sign if you need service ring the bell we'll accommodate you that is what a owe do with laws a

problem has to be fair and equal or if you want to real deal with the important cases the law becomes 10 thousand pages long and it is complicated but with instances of hardship have a body that makes the decision we're that body the building department 4 thousand cases i can tell where there's a hardship or type of feasibility and it they should have come to us, we resolve them quickly i'll be in favor not a major amount of the money when you get to full recovery, $91 million a year and we can do this. when this program was created i wrote a 3 page description within the

secretary of the commission gave it to dbi staff and i talked to deputy director of dbi not here said will not need additional staff to do that. and now we're told this will be the largest program we're totally strand so the solution for so far to are outreach and kudos to katie and over but the merchant association met with everyone and got the word out and the cases began to come back in but no enforcement and now the building department detailed the covid delay let's give everyone 24 months and no problem but now how many years into the program?

with the enforcement and the building department has set it up instead rolling applications and looking at categories and dealing with sub priorities january 1st have 7 thousand directors areas to be done or 7 thousand enforcement actions will be taken that's reimbursed shouldn't have happened and i love to see something else happen i like you to do today is talk to us the land use and transportation committee not a good place to talk about policy and program solutions this is a - we're going to have to conclude we answered the question all right. and the appeals commission do you have any records from the committee hearing i bet not their substantive i like you to consider age further yes make

the major changes but doesn't stop san francisco's leadership and when we were the first one the accessibility t m the first one in the nation for the mayor's office on disability the banks and the technical companies we worked out and solved the problems and now, one hundred thousand. >> thank you. >> thank you. is there address public comment. >> okay. one person. >> good morning, commissioners. i'll make this short my name is grace am the executive director of the benefit district. so i'm here, you know, to really ask for your support for this appeal. one thing that the cdb does we working closely with the small

businesses and back in 2000 we had a community meeting with the small businesses including members of the staff from the dbi and um, to talk about accessibility especially in the storefront and not everyone came but a few the get the motion starting the motion and they're building fund up to code and up to speed. but there are new businesses that are coming to japantown so with work kate at the office of small businesses and coming out of covid by still a lot more, you know, we need to get more foot traffic also seeing the renovation of people as well as the mall area that is

causing very much concern for guess small businesses and putting this working in a meeting with dp public works and the planning committee looking at grace can you get many of the small businesses along the mall if they need upgrades during the time can do it to a lot of things golden gate but the small businesses from what i know and hear, you know, every dollar counts to get come out of covid. so i ask for your support and that's it. thank you. >> thank you. any additional public comment? >> someone remotely? >> caller you're unmuted.

>> hello caller are you available? >> yes. >> hi. >> i'm sorry can you speak a little bit louder? >> i will try. >> okay. >> come up and speaking for san francisco. and i see (unintelligible) to note how few notices being heard today from the communities of people today with the establishments can't go to something as simple as a step

and the - the statement that was made is correct if you got this law, will be back to enforcing the regular state and sergeant code the reason was created in part was because of inadequacy of current state law. okay. this was a reviewingy - i haven't heard with an thing that addresses the previous ones that

outdoor with the supervisor they didn't want any more delays and those businesses are assessable not coming back with a proposal to end the program so i really feel this is a sad today that the community has not been consulted. the acting director of the mayor's office on disability said that she consulted with members of the committee but - she has an advisory committee and the mayor's office on disability council has heard nothing about that proposal. except for loss and me. so i question the need to throw out the baby with the bathwater exceptions in the law for historic properties

technical feasibility. or financial hardship. thousands of businesses (bell ringing) have been awarded those exceptions that process can continue. why i'm it is sad day the city will have this initiative and so many other ways wiring anticipating a lack of federal enforcement at every level of civil rights rather than and every other area bank of america i think the local civil rights enforcement (bell ringing) why. >> sir if you can wrap up your comments. >> why we are surrendering when it comes to accessibility with the mission star restaurants to it this day have a step can't are entered i don't

think this is the time to throw in the town council of a program and no amount of enforcement can do anything when the standard has changed this will actually reduce the standard. thank you. >> thank you. any additional remote public comment. >> that concludes public comment any commissioners have any iterations? >> (laughter) . thank you. >> um, you know what who can answer this on the new proposal opened to all of the i mention there is a cast inspector will be included can someone we are to that position as to whom that cast inspector will be made available for the merchant themselves to request and a free

inspection or what will be do. >> they'll think be on the inspection side outside of ab program with public final inspections want to be informing those folks with accessibility requirements to encourage our beneficiaries are informed but not specialists including a cast inspectors will transmit to better education of the exposures about intentions for our internal inspectors. >> okay. i'm going to if i may sky another question. >> do we have actual dbi inspections obtain ada posted the violations for flat out nova for a nova violation for a ada

violation. >> we don't enforce the ada we can't enforce on the ada a federal reserve requirement. >> would that explain - hearing this public comment as kind of throwing mow i've been working on this for 10 years and very, very proposed a lot of merchants on the corridor i have had a sidewalk regraded with $80,000 that happened. so i seen it all this is the first time i'm hearing about appeals the gentleman was here i've been on here three years now and i don't remember hearing about anything about the appeals. so let me try to ask the question if a storefront did get an nova for accessibility then no reason for them to upgrade their storefront

to for accessibility unless a drive by lawsuit i've seen that myself and it is easier to pay 10 or $15,000 to the person suing. by the work was not done, you know, the steps are still there and the bell the gentleman spoken about an older building i don't know who told them but someone was walking up and down the corridor giving out bells that is clearly a plagued with a blue cap sign ring the bell and call the front door service. so i am lost on the appeal part. um, and upcoming i was going into this fully supporting this appeal of this i mean, i i got

it small businesses but i'm not seeing with the barrier is if we have the appeals process in place and if they are in fact, working to everyone to make sure nobody will close because we can't regrade a $30,000 sidewalk and work with that so if you can help me figure that out i'll. >> sure. i want to acknowledge the numbers giving out the number filed for technical feasibility hardship is less than than 1,000 applying for the prose is a multi step process and unfortunately, folks don't go through would that i'm looking at the numbers let me pill this up. >> there we go.

>> as you can see of groups of the different categories you can prefor a exception the majority of the folks stopped partway through i just to be clear, not a, you know, check and box and grenade feasibility and there we go and in terms of appeals we have had some stuck in the process others have been referred to the ab if i allow mow i'm follow-up with the c nc and get back to you and some of the cases can be referred and a follow-up this is something different than what you have in here um, in order to file an appeal is it required to get addressed permit. >> qualified for technical hardship you'll yes get through though filing for a project.

>> have to go to the process i'm trying to understand; right? have to hire the civil engineer and go to the permit process and get the permit accepted does the permit - at what point like what point i'm and qualified to submit an appeal? >> i as a leading appeal through the process not grand and pi but i think i'm trying to get at what au questioning. >> ooichld what is the economic hardship of getting through the appeal it's what i'm trying to understand and it is long process i don't have the exact amount. >> no, no, no i did expect- >> (multiple voices). >> correct so i'm trying to imagine what are the steps one has to go through to fix the

appeal process? because, you know, this is not something that the big heads had exposure to and was that process looks like i think yeah i'm trying to understand - i have to comply with something what has to happen to get qualified to actually be able to appeal. >> yeah. >> let me qualify what the burden of proof to get to the feasibility and that can vary wildly? it is an historic this maybe pretty straightforward. you know, one of those grading issues to proof that maybe have to hire a civil engineer or architect to make that

determines. it can be vary wildly so the burden of proof can be huge i think the there isn't a clear burden of proof because it is different for each building and it is case by case and to answer the question on appeals i expect to appeal the process the first step i can appeal that determination and as you if you're not granted so a multiple steps commissioners that is a case by case and hardship is really the property property owner and particularly to resources can be very difficult to discern in case by case. >> that is where we're going to lean on the board of appeals for the determination on a case by case and determine the appropriate burden what it will

be. >> am i finding that correctly and yo i'm sorry yes, yes and of the nine hundred before people have initiated that process was the slide you're showing is that out-of-date i believe that is out-of-date as of october i can circle back with more numbers that is expended 5 times those numbers are not changing; right? the folks that responded have done that years and the intention not particularly those numbers are not likely to change. >> what the department the external process when an appeal is received from moving it on to the ab. >> i have to circle back with tom. >> can you answer that?

>> get to the mic i'm sorry. >> so tom is you are access appeal board secretary. and when he um, determines a case right for that he'll have the ash. >> how many of the nine hundred and 54. >> i don't have the exact fabulous with me. >> you have reason to believe that 2 is incorrect. >> a small number yes. >> can you help you understand help me understand um, we have all the appeals but why they - is there is a reason - and i don't have that information with me i can circle back. >> one thick i want to clarify not all are appeals they can

appeal during the process but not necessarily all the folks are asking for an appeal. >> how many are. >> you know what but have to circle back on the number i believe - there is information on how to appeal. >> i think this isn't exactly why it is showing this program sort of being asked to be sunsetted. out of purpose and pushed the line and created i'm some change and was great success but right now, we're creating additional burden for the department and business owners and i would like to ask the question so what are the trigger points for having to do accessibility upgrades. my understanding and change for my business or if there are permit

issues beyond a dollar amount. >> correct major renovations roughly $200,000. >> (laughter.) >> are you - >> you know, it's been brought up we had several expectations for the purpose if program i remembered plus a 10 percent contingency that required and in the extensions um, extreme solution to this i've heard this did not perform we have should sounds like other parts of progress overlooked or just

could be improved i'm not convinced this is the task but you know what in the department has more information why we're not moving things to the board of appeals and i understand the financial hardship for businesses. i understand that and i feel like we're walking and tight line i don't want to push on where this is an undue hardship and a disservice to the disabled community so i don't can i see where i'm coming from why there is no middle ground. >> the cac like to see perhaps expanded way for compliance what that looks like is expanding the hardship cases we'll i understand up utilizing the department of resources what

they do to expand that and allow the folks to utilize and the feasibility will not increase so the things have been proposed in the middle ground for not increasing the accessibility so make sure the resources are toward and moving away from the enforcement and maybe i can pull up this slide we are doing numerous actions for the past inspector on the back end to file the hypotheticals with more holistic action on the accessibility and 6 thousand businesses not in compliance any bit of information what that kind of businesses like one public comment say the restaurants i have for the seen any sort analysis of the code claiming financial hardship do we have any information.

>> i don't have that but can check on that and get back to you. >> thank you. >> oh. >> all right. well a couple of points and then overall opinion so my understanding the current legislation before the court exceptions and hardship is technical feasibility and so under 1105 d unreasonable hardship in compliance with the consultation of appeal commissioned will publish guidelines when an unreasonable hardship will be approved in the appeal process i don't believe will be actually all that difficult with up and coming if the appeal process is utilized then will develop as i i guess an anesthesiology with the

vacate appeals no incentive to are sort to the appeal process. you know, to me that seems be on explanation not the only explanation why they are fallen through and actually gone through with the appeal. um, now this generally speaking my largerist issue i feel that is functionally dishonest i building what this is an appeal of ab program but the intention to repeal the program. the idea

to return to the status queue there the litigation and reports return to the 2015 model. in this proposed legislation there is symbolic hand waiving the department will be taking on expensive casts person the we're in a budget crises we'll be taking on a smaller position so we would not seem we were reilly the ab program. i'm - when it comes to the alignment of dbi resources a good use of dbi resources and i this is disability assessment for the

potential resources being worth while and yeah. i think whether the enforcement works or did work i believe not actually a test of that is the case yet only every every time we get to the deadline there is an extension and not been any process though i'm sympathetic for the better late than never have been coerced for the burden and perhaps, you know, perhaps will be a better this will be better handled though litigation why i don't know why this is the - the purpose of legislation why it is drafted the way it is.

[off mic.] >> oh. >> well, so yes there is - to me 3 appears there is, you know, an absence of political will to potentially put this into the business owners to put this in compliance. part of recognize that the leases they have entered in part due to the recognize the puts the businesses under and - of course, i'm sympathetic to that. >> however, you know, the laws is in place if going to be in place has to be enforces to have a man and woman we've not attempted that i believe building the position i was getting at if there were something else needed

clarification thank you. >> commissioner. >> so enforcement will mean issuing how many novas. >> on january 1st. >> i believe over 7 thousand. >> okay. >> and sorry. >> can i speak for a moment of enforcement just to be clear, 4 thousand properties that are out of compliance on january 1st, 2000, will be out of a valuable use of resources will impact the codes violations the construction but other housing code violations just to be clear, the impact we have a delay in our directors hearing for the law enforcement this is a became cyclone so while a lot of merit in pursuing those cases

just to be clear, the compact will be in the enforcement in our ability to make sure that people are following the building code and the housing code a constraint we are clear that in didn't go forward we have to enforce that will really lock down the ability to enforcement and other work. >> i think the realty our ability as a department to enforce 7 thousand novas on january 1st will not be real and what we tried to do is build a system of 6 instead carrot i'm hearing from the small businesses and katie if yours is on the line i'd like to hear candidates incentives to move for ada compliance and like to

guess he works for the disabled for 5 years and i actually ran a database called access nyc and part of what we did went through and saved and talked to small businesses, mostly in the union square of new york asking them to come into ada not just front doors and bathrooms and moving the cables so enough room for access for wheelchair users and things of that nature it is difficult really hard work to do um, and the specific technicalities what that means to be compliant for accessibility like the bars are hard especially, when you're doing like rehab work. when new construction no problem but looking at rehab work i mean, i,

you know, do affordable housing. and it can be a real cost burden and our properties trying to get, you know, to compliance um, which we're retrofitting buildings some old buildings have narrow hallways or things of that nature and so many factors make this a complicated issue. i think that making this um, a situation where we're throwing sticks at people um, rather than and putting a burden on the department rather than trying to create incentives and using and carrot method didn't mean there isn't still ability to improve we reached and went

big it didn't work so, now have to take a step back. >> thank you i'm still here katie tang from the office of small businesses fiscal year 2021 we started a grant program that called the barrier removal program as an incentive for business owners to make accented improvements we offer up to $10,000 in reimbursement for the physical improvements and include covering the cost of a cap inspector or an architect the materials and, of course, prevailing wage that is verified so i'll say we started this in the first year had 20 businesses that bend from 3 program and our outreach continued to grow and

2023/24 increased to one hundred and 22 businesses been a good carrot, if you will, for compliance at least to the extent it is possible at the moment. >> and can you - there's a comment about um, taxes incentives and the passage of prop m and the labeled within the small businesses can can you talk about like how businesses will or not able to september access any tax breaks related to this? >> there are federal um, tax credits and expectations businesses what access because $10,000, inc., won't cover anything with a tax exemption to make you whole if the improvements those are available

and we um, put a reminder in the letters for businesses to remind them of that. thank you. >> um, and while we have katie any questions for the businesses. >> okay. >> thank you for being on the line i appreciate your time. >> commissioners? >> um, i agree with vice president neumann and inclined to support this local requirement removeal and ada i think like listening to what katie said in the program modifying the ordinance to help the small business help the businesses we will end up with

more technical feasibility rather than increasing the accessibility. which for wouldn't resolve what we're trying to look for and like to give more carrots than sticks and to the issue the lawsuit i feel like if i get an expectation for the city doesn't mean is businesses will be subject to ada laws didn't prohibition small businesses from sort of civil lawsuits either. >> i'm a little bit frustrated access is happy new year we're going to give up on enforcement i get this is a hardship and hearing what you're saying some thought it we'll be doing one

not necessary improving access by compliance again, we had this passed in 2016 and i know because a pause because of the pandemic but we think continue to have problems and well question did the expense and aware of the problems and our recommendation to improve enforcement not a great solution i'm frustrated will the process we have should have had conversations long time ago on the commission we identified challenges right before deadlines and then so say we have to remove responsibilities about a month before we're going to be placed on undue burden this is a continue thing about the budget now and then and i think we need to be more

pro-active about those things and should has been other solutions brought to us. i still don't feel comfortable moving forward and not convinced otherwise i don't still an appeal process but shouldn't be making everyone - you'll see problems i've heard we could have fixed and while ago and especially for something for the community just chosen to go above and beyond and shouldn't be upset about and failed i think we should continue to look for ways to improve - enforce them and to go above and beyond based on the problems we've heard um, i want to express the

frustration on that and is carrot approach i think you're correct. >> the carrot approach can be effective and in fact, i think the evidence was effective for 80 percent of the properties effected - considered here and that's what that bears out. i think the dilemma and we're presented with for the 80 percent of the properties in which the carrot approach was not effective and what do we do about that with the properties whether we proceeds with enforcement or back down and we, you know, we get them and lose the game of chicken with this (laughter) you know, um, another issue with

the enforcement and the burden on the department um, you know, we have issued 7 thousand notifications we will prioritize the worst offenders and find a way to do if we need, too, and the last point as far as testing outer enforcement as a mechanism to get people properties to come into compliance we i don't know if we enforce a handful that gets the remaining hold out to come into compliance we don't know unless we enforce those are my parting thoughts other than

that. >> i i care very much about that issue, however, we have helped safety issues in front of us are life-threatening that is important we moved the needle pretty far all of the perhaps that can be brought into compliance easily have done so. we didn't offer and carrot but the threat of enforcement and we just kept moving the deadline. whether or not we're now actually like follow through think those threat or like okay. we could better use our resources elsewhere. and i think at that point we're running with the department the department is running a deficit we have plan to get full recovery but is that

the best use of everyone's time, effort, dollars and that's not to say that compliance with accessibility is not important that is important. um, i just can't in good conscience like say let's move forward and let's issue 7 thousand novas on january 1st i don't honestly think that will move the accessibility needle it is just holding a line for the sake of saying we said we're going to do this so, now we're going to do that. >> i don't want to put myself on the list so i'll jump in (laughter) so i have questions for the department. exactly what goes away from this legislation passes? >> so chapter 11 will remain

the enforcement mechanism in the chapter will be reached we'll be required to work with the small business commission and there are other hangovers like definition in the charter but substantive enforcement will be removed. >> so this substantive enforcement measure. um, is the pro-active where someone calls makes a complaint. >> so if someone calls with a complaint with the building code we just say that's fine. >> if you're violating the building code those are are related to impoverishment specific to the front door. so if. >> if someone calls in and makes a complaint we enforce it

is that mr. koretz. >> in your inspector is at the property and sees a violation can they 0 issue a notice of violation. >> yes. >> what is going away is us sending notice of violations for the violation? >> just the pro-active enforcement. >> little ab e was only jurisdiction every other jurisdiction has the same jurisdiction requirement not just you have to proactively comply with the front doors this is the pro-active specific to the interest. >> so if i go i'm saying calling 9-1-1 at every entrance i see dbi will issue a notice of

violation. >> we'll enforce the compliance of program that's little 7 thousand non-compliant with the building code in the compliance has 3 deadlines on the checklist with the permits and has a deadline to complete the work; right? that compliance is what we're going focusing on and trying to say we can beef up the compliance; right? through the enforcement but people comply with the program the entrances may not be great strides in access because of waivers and is exemption and is equivalent so not louder than the building code that will be enforces. >> what? >> fees recommended to that and ada is the disability assess it endorsed like most of the building codes. this part is

removed to your point pro-active about the compliance to the program. >> the program is administrative? >> the program is the pro-active requirement to upgrades the requirements. >> if you do major renovations. ■:ap. ilyle t. n- so

ft au ífealoob■ñnwic ssng8n txtte

can we show id■? a oinance supe mar. next slide, b of next sli, inla this ord this■ n of this and■■ is changing o rep

the spefgdz doosstate law of the't■; hotel or establish tenancies forxt slide, please.r largely amends the■wdes addso ta nor and iet last week ■8 andq!presentation. i'll■de happy to ansr any dvremotely?

>>. okay. seeing noe, commison questio y t pass on al housing providero advocateo >> okay. >> nike entertaimo/- bysote prident alexantu ■s >> en>> commissionerr comssn

andhatrries item as exander-tut stated the director's report were submitted to t comssion and$x they werubl ■hone is there remotely and no public ■ remote a no publ makenquies to staff regarding various cuments, st to thcommission. and/or deterneplaced on the agendathe next meeting and othefuture meetings of the il. >> o next on er we

wi be■h regular e.c. and a process internal process forefo ification pross,■ members of the public wss . >> okay. tha you. i'd like to like to policy this. >> um, in ght of tod access i

depament can't enforce that ce e will d toave a7# what owe so a even though we >> commissioner ch thinking ti know, wei]■c geto an endou■ add e pro-acti■g changes in the interimth whatom to

find the s■tory that was 5 the toughest wepgers andiltits process butuch smallel5■4 discussg toide with youformon >> i■ think the■ñ tms ■' having an

>> a >> 8. review and approval of o the minu■tes the regul meeting o possessionh-yo>& t■ minute >> ■ second. >> t■lre's a nadition, andshop

everyo to bck thanr that you speoc en■ cmunity tohrdollar matter a■fnd buy black. thgoal was to to may not be ■v■■

noally be poto art= it fix al, scie >> i'm ■éfan, i'm ilstand five. it's justi n in kindergarten and i start paitil

consistent but what waeralways wafothe cartoons to freeze and case i remember getting into anemai beone ■of pression that i carelf research there is a ects them a autht art students a learning t art ■5history and

in the ■x learni a predors.ns after >> 'tshe would become a artist?pthe city that love t4ahe ar when ere is dience or l >> well bee we seek to know ale 89gerahavea even from nd

early 20th cryvw public ■art oppo apply to publiart.fa >> i hope it stays with ■añnthe and lingers and they chew on it d thin■xabo it.pa4eit y not im at starts the ning ofwould like or start mean to be an artis■ot? and how

■"g is filipino mexican cuzeen.e the lipi style we grew up on tha ite tos. wehag for everody. we have a ■'s and-trying to create■= something get anything any time.love food and

wa ■ be a ef. i was in thof it and bring something special to ■- i to my businegil foodand we share a es parents to be ourselves analso for our parents and you know, our families. j fa á■re in a honor and makes me feel proud of myself and city as we. just to to add to is so specia. spck ó"specialness, but you just çw