under review by dbi 57. under review by permit processing center and other agencies, san francisco fire, 49. no routing. so we track these weekly to see how many they are. >> supervisor kim: none of these numbers are consistent with the ones that were just presented in the power point presentation. you said that 345 were approved. and 85 were built. it looks like here, only 46 were built. >> these are the numbers that were provided. we can look into and get to, supervisor. >> supervisor kim: so the numbers in the power point presentation, you're not certain if those are correct. so we don't know if we built 45 or 86 adus? that's a pretty significant difference. it's ok. why don't we take some time. i'm not trying to put you on the spot. i just want to have an understanding of what has been done and what hasn't. we'll go to the next presentation. it would be great to get the accurate numbers, how many permits were approved and how many were actually built since the inception of the program. thank you so much.

update on dbi's finances. good morning, commissioners. deputy director of dbi. today, i have two reports. i'll start with the second one, that is the final fiscal year budget. in february, the commission had approved a budget we submitted to the mayor's office. the mayor had a chance to review it and it went to the board of supervisors and was recently passed in july. so this is the final. i want to go over a couple of the changes which you approved. on the revenue side, there were no changes. we stuck with the revenue projections, the only difference in the end, once the final budget, if we have revenues that were needed to make up the full amount of the budget, we'll use our fund balance, so the controls at $5.9 million to get to the full budget. on expenditure side, there were major changes. one was a decrease in salaries. that was primarily due to some increases in attrition. so we had a lot of vacant positions, we're filling them, but others would get vacant. the board of supervisors budget analyst recommended they reduce our petitions from 1-fte to a lower

jamie and bill from dbi. and then a huge thank you to anty displacement coalition for help in developing this legislation, especially justin and tommy from the housing life committee and rose maria from the tenderloin housing clinic. i want to thank charlie from the san francisco apartment association for reviewing this and providing feedback. thank you so much. with that, in my colleagues have any questions or comments. >> supervisor tang: i think we just wanted to see the amendments and maybe we could look at them while comment is going on. >> supervisor ronen: it is in the packet you have. thank you. >> supervisor tang: thank you. we can just go to public. >> supervisor kim: i wanted to say something. first i just want to thank supervisor ronen and her office for their really incredible work on this ordinance. i know when we had a number of major fires in district nine but also district six, many of us were wracking or rain or a legislation that would be appropriate to addressing this without doing a city

we work in collaboration with dbi as we're a contractor for dbi. i am the program manager for the program. we do various outreach and take tenants who come into our office with various issues of elevator habitability issues. so over the last few months, we've had tenants come in and talk to us, slash, we've also done research of the building. the jostling of the elevator, the non-functioning of the elevator, the huge gap. it's a gap and it's also not leveling. there are kind of what we do to assess the building and see who's living in the building, there are individuals who are elderly, who have mobility issu issues, who are a little bit worried about dropping items in the gap. one tenant, in particular, i know mr. sirosh is aware, a tenant had dropped her keys inside this gap, and she had lost her keys in there. i believe it was the 23rd of august of this year that mr. sirosh, who was talking, they did have a meeting with the tenants in the building. what i was told by tenants is that that meeting included discussion about voting on what needed to

i'm not sure if we should bring dbi back up. did you need more time? we're not opening up for public comment. i'm asking if the department of building inspection wanted to come back with the updated numbers? >> ok for the updated number for the week ending 9-21-18, 81. rent controlled adus 74. total number of adus was 474. >> supervisor kim: i'm sorry. you said tot i'm sorry. you said total number of adus is 474. what does that mean? >> for the week ending september 21, this year, total number of adus completed, the owner has received a certificate of completion, they can rent the unit, total number is 81. of the approved and issued adus, program to date, so received approval from the city to begin construction, that would be an additional 393 adus on top of that completed number. >> supervisor kim: on top of the 81. so not 343, 393? >> correct. so those are the adus in action. >> supervisor kim: ok. >> so that's kind of the updated number. >> supervisor kim: great. and then roughly 889 submitted permits, not the number of adus. thank you so much. so a

it's not clear when dbi will respond to the findings of these reports. in san francisco, melanie woodrow, abc 7 news. >> michael finney is here with more on that, really dangerous. >> this is an odd one. very odd. walmart is recalling almost a quarter million camping axes. they can detach and fall off the handle. the ozark trail camp axes. they have a black nonslip rubber grip and claw feature. they have model number 60111140 printed on the package. they were sold from january 2017 through july of this year. at least two people were cut when their ax heads detached. if you have one, take it back to the store for a refund. a new study finds that workers are paying a greater share of their health costs. they say more companies are making workers pay an annual deductible or, rather, just put it in clear words, increasing the amount that the employee must spend before the insurance kicks in. kaiser says the average cost of a family health care plan in 2018 for the company and worker together about $20,000. advocacy groups say facebook messenger violating law

city law and rent board policy by prohibiting pass-throughs for fire upgrades subject to an order by dbi and fire. we would ask the committee and board of supervisors to consider a provision to bring it into accordance with the capital improvement law. it targets truly problem mat hick buildings in giving dbi discretion about what sort of upgrades to mandate, we are generally supportive of the ordinance. and we believe it strikes an appropriate balance to target problematic buildings without punishing good actors. thank you. >> public: hello. i'm a tenant at 634 powell street. i urge the committee to support this legislation. i want to thank you for your diligence and detailed wording in the legislation. san francisco's the largest landlord is veritos operating a business model that makes a compelling case for this legislation. since 2007, it has acquired more that 250 rental controlled buildings, many in which have years or even decades of deferred maintenance. rather than make sensible and sustainable improvements for the benefit of existing tenants, it has rolled out a business plan t

hours of construction, again, are regulated by dbi from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. although the preliminary staff recommendation is that this project was generally compliant with both the code and design guidelines a last-minute review suggests that reducing the second floor ceiling height from 12 feet would better address the issue of scale, massing, window proportions and privacy brought forward by the d.r. requester. staff is recommending that u yo take d.r. and maybe look at the height of the second story which was not really the focus of our review. we were looking at the addition. and this would probably bring the project to an acceptable condition, not exceptional or extraordinary. that is my report. >> all right. thank you. d.r. requester. ms. hepburn. sure. whomever. good evening, commissioners, and so there are two things about this project we really are strongly against as neighbors. number one is the third floor addition with the height and the second one is the west side, the windows they are adding. if we can switch to the projectorment -- to the proje

sf-dbi new process retains the reviewer's responsibility to the director in align with the number of jurisdictions that the contractor -- that the contract directly with reviewers attach the clause for the project sponsor. previously the city of san francisco procedures for procurement of professional service have not been suited to directly contracting with consulting engineers. and reviewers instead contracted with the project sponsor. the revie rears are, nonetheles, responsible and under the directions of the director. so the change to this is that we contract directly through the peer review group down. the engineers -- the engineer records is solely responsible for the construction contract documents. documents in the reviewer will be retained as part of the fdbi files. each reviewer is selected by the director based on the reviewer's qualifications applicable to the project and considering the availability with the project scale. the director may at his or her discretion consult with the project sponsor and the engineer of record and others before selecting the reviewers. the

i want to thank dbi. i think they've been very diligent in staying on top of. them for this process either. just so you know what we've done, we brought in an architectural preservationist to restore it to the type of previous construction. we've gone through a whole long process. i think we're just about to the end of it. >> if there's anything we can do, we'll be happy to do it. >> commissioner walker? >> i think it's laudable that there's an attempt to preserve this as affordable housing, but there was clear violations presented by the staff in the initial -- i believe it's appropriate for a motion to uphold the order of abatement, assess fees to the current date. hold in advance for a year and give this time to play out and hopefully encourage moving forward with replacing this housing. i think there's acknowledgment on both sides that there was problems in the beginning. there's all sorts of things that are not followed in this case. i move to uphold the order of abatement, assess fees to current date, waive fees, as possible, going forward, and hold an ad