mr. bruno mr. bruno, you have 14 minutes. >> thank you, commissioners, board members, thank you for listening to this appeal of a permit that was activated in november of 2014 without any notice to any of the people living in the building where the work was to be done. some of that work began in november of 2014 and had been continued in january for 5 days of this year. at that point an inspector from the city, inspector dennis yee, and the housing department was called by me because i was wondering how they could do this tremendous amount of work, what i thought was a demolition because it was so noise , without notifying anybody in the building. i was informed by mr. yee, the inspector, that they can't because the buildings are so old they predate 1979, that there's a law on the books, according to the housing department -- i've since read the law, of course -- called the san francisco lead based paint abatement ordinance. and that oird napbs is one of the only ordinances that require buildings that fall into our category, oru, which is an r2 residential category, those buildings are required to be noticed, the residents aren't required but in this case they are because of the lead-based paint because of the environmental hazards that lead-based paint could have on people who live in the neighborhood and in the building. so in our building in particular there's one woman who is pregnant so that's important i think to know and there's me, who has a long-term problem with my breathing and there's other people who are consider bli older than me. but regardless of that, we might all be in perfect health. the idea of notice in the city of san francisc

mr. bruno is engaged in what we consider to be a campaign of what we consider to be obstruction and harassment. mr. bruno does not live in the building that is subject to these permits. mr. bruno alleges lead but he acknowledges he has no proof of lead paint. the only misstake that was made in the issuance of the first permit was my client mistakenly listed the wrong address, but was corrected in a subsequent permit. my client was a lead certified, the contractor, who is a lead certified contractor, make ready, inc., gabe santos will talk and will, as he is sworn under penalty of perjury, claim that he issued and sent out proper notices throughout the actual block and lot and that he complied with the requirements of the lead rules and regulations. interestingly, the only person who has made incessant complaints to the department of building inspections has been mr. bruno no one else has made complaints to the building inspector and it is our claim someone is removing those signs and there after calling the department of building inspection and i will call upon mr. santos. >> good evening, gabe santos, make ready. i think the board might understand about the confusion o