mr. duffy? >> good evening, commissioners. joe duffy, d.b.i. at the last hearing, i was asked to give an opinion on the work at 4500 third street. that -- i didn't have that -- all of they see documents with me, which is why we continue it had in a way as well. so i'll just readout the application number, and the permit, as you heard, was for the conversion of a liquor store to youth learning center and other various aspects of work. the value of the work is $350,000. the application is a form 8. it means it's an over the counter approval. it's currently in file status. it's -- it's been -- it's been through building plan check, mechanical plan check, intake, d.p.w. have looked at it. it still needs to go to planning, and it needs to go to the mayor's office of disability. now, the permit application and the plans are in the possession of the permit applicant. they haven't done much since january 2018, but i wouldn't anticipate that they are going to do this work and get the permit. the reason we couldn't review the plans is we don't have them

>> i have a question for mr duffy. i think -- why don't you go ahead? >> i think it would be good of you to explain a little bit of how the code looks at the property line windows. >> the windows on the front? when you don't have a property line window? >> correct. >> with a property window in san francisco, you have to comply with provisions. there is about eight requirements. i can read the whole section. i have it with me. they have to be a three-quarter are rated window with a sprinkler head about that. you have to give a notarized statement, declaration, that if someone builds against that wall that you lose those windows, and you give up the right to them. they are not allowed to be used for it light or ventilation or egress windows. they're normally a fixed window. you see, use to see the old wired glass in them and now people pay extra to get the fire light glass in them. is there any other things there that i can offer? >> that light -- the reason i ask, is it is something that i found out, not having known that before, is that the building dep

mr. duffy: if we are going to get this done, this is the thought process that mr. barr has put in this bill of creative thinking, using resources that we have available to us to help people who are getting crushed by these devastating drugs. i know the ranking member cares about those people deeply, and i know she's fought for those folks who have been inflicted with drug abuse and i just ask her to join us and say let's do a small demonstration project, just 10,000, let's work together. with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas reserves. the gentlelady from california is recognized. ms. waters: yes, mr. duffy, you are absolutely correct. i care about this issue very deeply, and i want to do the right thing and i want you to know, while you are talking -- the 2.8 -- what is it million -- 2.8 million vouchers, do you know there are five million people who are in need of these vouchers? if so, you cannot make the argument that there's more than enough to go around with all of these people standing in line. when they

are you aware of that project at all, mr. duffy? >>> no, i'm not aware of that one, actually. i just looked up the permits and the plans for 4522. but what i'm hearing is it's going from a retail to some sort of educational use. that would be a change of use in occupancy and could be a b occupancy or an e occupancy. the code section has changed a bit in the last couple years. the term complied with requirements of this code for such division or group of the occupancy as used in this section shall remain in compliance with the lateral force provisions of section 301.2. so section 301 and 329 are where they're telling you what to do structurally. i can read those sections as well. but i think the 10% of the occupant load of the entire building of the structure. so, you know, just from listening to mr. paul, it might be a good idea for them to ask for a determination from technical services division on that. if the plans are submitted. but if it's going from an am occupancy to some sort of a more increased one, that increases it by more than 10%. >>> commercial is what, 250 for o

. >> we will hear from mr duffy, the senior inspector with d.b.i. >> commissioners, joe duffy, d.b.i. so, two permits. one permit to comply

[please standby for captioner switch] >> welcome, mr. duffy. >> i'm bevan duffy. i'm a parent of a public school child who's been in our public school system for seven years, and i want to thank miss marshall for letting us speak. i thought i had good relations on the school board, but none of you are smiling to see me tonight, so i'll just thank miss casco, who i have great admiration for. in my involvement in public schools, i've been very student focused. i'm not a great athlete, but i coached soccer fore two seasons. i read in the classroom every week when my child was a fifth grader, and for three school years, i volunteered every week in sensory motor. so i see kids, and i think the presentation -- and i have the utmost respect and admiration for miss o'keefe. i've got to say that the lack of participation and the waste of food in our school is very concerning to me. and i would like to suggest and, you know, the data was described as saying there has been a reduction at lunch. and that's the most important time. i mean, kids come into school. hey may o may

mr. duffy for one and a half minutes. >> thank you. we don't take responsibility for our own actions. we should blame somebody else for our poor behavior in our incitement of violence. mr. secretary, welcome. thank you for coming to wisconsin and participating in our homelessness summit. coming to wisconsin in january is not a time people chooses to come and see us but we had 4 been people who came to speak. i want to talk but things we have been working on in the housing and m-ens subcommittee with your partnership, focusing on homelessness and low human being -- low-income housing it's fascinating things we can do together on a bipartisan level. we have voted bills into the housing choice voucher act with unanimous votes, bipartisanship can happen when we work together and with your participation. we do do great things when everybody work together, including working with hud. and again i'm grateful for your participation. i think it's wonderful when our aim is working on programs that lift pe

mr. duffy, did you want to weigh in? okay. is there any public comment on this matter? okay. seeing none, commissioners, this rehearing request is submitted. >> commissioners. >> well, it's a hard bar for rehearing. it requires manifest injust or new information that was not available. the information going over that was supplied in the brief in regards to the form for the rent board, i found that it indicated acknowledgment but did not affirm or take a position. so i feel that i would not sponsor rehearing. any other comments? is there a motion? >> that would be my motion to deny the rehearing request. >> okay. a motion to deny the rehearing request because -- >> there's no manifest injustice. >> or new evidence? >> right. >> on that motion, president fung. [ roll call ] >> okay. motion passes, the rehearing request, not accepted. so we will now move on to item number six. item number six is appeal number 18-045 concerning the subject property at 1599 haight street. clayton street neighbors versus san francisco public works bureau of street use and mapping for verizon wirele

mr. duffy's legislation offers a much more reasonable threshold that allow shareholders to have a voice on the burning public companies with proposals supported by a very small group of shareholders. i strongly support this legislation moving forward but what can the sec do to make >>se changes in the meantime i intend to look at that. if you don't mind, i would take a minute. investorsin street should understand the corporate governance in america has changed substantially in the last decade. and that the ability of shareholders to directly influence of management has increased. that has benefits. but it's going to change. we should be looking at that change and how it has changed the way corporations behave. communicating with america investors what that change means. >> you discussed looking at the proxy process. . we had an open comment. period in themment past. this includes the plumbing. do we have the right plumbing in light of the theme of monetization? ? i want to search over to virtual currencies. can you tell me what criteria the sec is using to determine which token projects sh

mr. duffy's legislation offers a much more reasonable threshold allowing shareholders to have a voice while not burdening public companies with proposals supported by a very very small group of shareholders. while i strongly support this legislation moving forward, what can sec do to make these changes in the meantime? >> we can look at the proxy process and i intend to look at that as part of an overall assessment of the proxy process. i think if you don't mind i would take a minute-- >> please do. >> ordinary investor, mainstream investor in people we think about, i think they should understand corporate governance in america has changed substantially in the last decade as a result of various changes and that the ability of shareholders to directly influence the actions of management have increased. that has benefits, but it's been a change and we should be looking at that change and how it has changed the way corporations behave and i think communicating with american investors on what that change means. >> you mentioned looking at the proxy process. what is your timeline do you anticipa

mr. duffy's legislation offers a much more reasonable threshold that allows sharehrsave a voice, while not burdening public companies supported by a small group of shareholders. while i strongly support this legislation moving forward, what can the s.e.c. do to make these changes in the meantime? >> we can look at the proxy process, but i intend to look at that as part of an overall assessment. if you don't mind, i'll take a minute. ordinary investor, retail investors, the people we think about, i think they should understand that corporate governance in america has changed in the last decade as a result of various changes. and the ability of shareholders to directly influence the actions of management has increased. now, that has benefits. but it's been a change. and we should be looking at that change and how it has changed the way corporations behave, and i think communicating with american investors on what that change means. >> you mentioned looking at the proxy process. what sort of timeline would you anticipate for the s.e.c. looking at that process? >> we had an open comment period

mr. duffy and i both agree, and everybody who handled this yesterday agreed, and raised the question, can we eliminate this? everybody says yes. i agree also. i said, it is realistic -- is it realistic for us to declare war, and saved by the year whatever, we are going to eliminate lead-based paint as a problem in the united states of america? now, not only in public housing, we are talking about people living in houses that are not public housing. and completely unaware of the dangers that lead-based paint has. i know the damage it can do -- i know as well as you -- this is your area -- is it realistic, can you accept the challenge of meeting with this multiagency group and saying, look, we can solve this problem. let's all get together and declare war, the taxpayers would love it if we could end a problem, and not have to revisit it again. >> i agree with you, very much. i would very much love to eliminate the problem, we are making good process -- rug -- progress, related to the cdc survey,