Affects the fire risks and so many other things, its really important that we do this. As well as the atmospheric conditions around it. 30 of our atmospheric issues are affected by this. Its huge. Its its as big as or equal to the auto emissions. And, you know, we take big steps around that. And i feel like this is a big step. So thank you for bringing it forward and working on this. Thank you. Yeah. If i could just say, you know, i agree. Thank you for bringing this forward. And, you know, the Difficult Conversations with shadows and things like that, like those are coming because we have chronically underbuilt using the land of this city. You know, we know that twothirds of it is a singlefamily home only zoning. We know thats a major reason for the drastic climate horribleness that has happened, driving places, not living near transit, not dense housing. And so those will be Difficult Conversations. But theyre coming whether or not, you know, this one ordinance goes through or not. Im glad that you brought it up. Because i think its something were all going to have to get yeah, were all going to be talking about a lot. So thank you. You know, mr. Hooper, ill close out my comments. I echo and support everything, of all of the commissioners here. This is where were going. This is where the city needs to go. And i do believe in this. Once again my probable is the my problem is the knockon effects. This legislation could do with some amendments in there, that would be reflective of potentially calling out the concerns that we would see on my side of the industry anyhow, that need to be owned and recognized. Were back to the situation i do not want to be part of legislation being passed. That really cant get done, because we just dont sit down and take the time, because sometimes i think legislation is written and its really not the problem of the legislator at that time. Its somebody elses problem down the road. Particularly in the dbi scenario, i see a lot of problems here with this. Fundamentally disagree with your numbers, because i do the numbers myself every day. It is more expensive to build a single family, allelectric home. But thats not what im pushing back on. Imish pushing back on that its not very well talked through, particularly in the planning issues. And particularly in how we do get enough solar panels on our roofs, that will meet the criteria and things like that. I see a lot of issues from the building point of view, because were a land locked town. Our zoning has not been good for this. Now were trying to adapt. So i cannot support it today. Its not i cant support it in the format its written. I do believe you have the votes. Its not ready for prime time. Thank you, mr. Hooper. Clerk okay. Thank you. We call for Public Comment already. Well do a roll call vote. Is there a motion to approve . And a second . Move to approve. Clerk is there a second . Seeing none. Clerk no second . Okay. So what do i do . Take the vote. If the movement is youve considered the motion, at this time do not support it. Then that would be the alternative motion. Deputy City Attorney. Okay. Clerk so the motion to not move forward . Is there an alternative motion to present . What was the way you framed it, sorry . I believe the president mentioned possibly having amendments to the issue or to the ordinance. If you have proposed amendments that you can recommend or the board can say we do not we consider but do not recommend. At this stage, i think its a lot of work to be done to consider but not recommend. And deputy City Attorney again. To be clear, i believe a digest that wasnt included in your ordinance. And i believe theres a lot of information presented here. But the ordinance itself specifically just makes a distinction of a 10 additional efficiency over a Standard Building for mixed gas. There are no solar requirements or allelectric requirements. Its just an additional performance requirement for mixed fuel. Yeah. And duly noted. The point that i would like to, make, lets get it right from the start. This could do with a lot more help in find of foreseeing the potential knockon effect down the road. Thats all were asking for. Obviously its a lot to consider here. And if there needs to be done meetings on this, and we have a timeframe, im fine with that. This is happening. I get it. Its just in the way its written right now, its too lucy goosy for our industry. I think the alternative motion then would be that you do not recommend the ordinance, as is. As is written. Yes. Or you can also not do anything. Well, you have to close the item out, either saying youve considered it or not. You cant have a motion saying weve considered the ordinance, but pass on no recommendations. I cant. Sorry. Could you repeat that, the last sentence. The board cant say weve considered the item, but do not have a recommendation. Oh. That would not be necessarily saying it shouldnt go forward, saying weve considered the item. So id like to make a motion that we consider the item and not recommend to go forward, as its written, is that correct . Yes. Your motion would be we consider the item, but do not recommend approval, as written. As written. And can you have the caveat were open to amendments to be made . Is that not necessary. You can. The board so responsibility here is to consider the item. And to weigh present your consideration. Ill second that. Thanks. Clerk okay. So there was a motion and a second. Ill do the roll call vote. President mccarthy . No. Clerk Vice President walker . Yes. Excuse me. Clerk yes. Do you need to call that question again . Clerk would you like to state it . The motion is that youve considered but do not pass along recommendation, as written. And so thats the motion that was proposed and seconded. And the first vote was take that count again. Clerk okay. President mccarthy . Yes. Clerk Vice President walker . No. Clerk commissioner clinch . Yes. Clerk commissioner moss . Yes. Clerk commissioner warshell . Yes. Clerk okay. So the motion carries 41. Okay. Thank you. Next item is item 7. Directs report, 7a update on dbis finances. Good morning, commissioners. Deputy director for the department of building inspection. And before you are two Financial Reports. The first is the september 2019 Financial Report. Its the Financial Report for the third month of the fiscal year and ill go over a couple of highlights. Basically our revenues yeartodate revenues are first three months of the fiscal year at 17th million, compared to 17. 3 million last year. So pretty much equal to where we were last year. For the expenditures for the first three months of this fiscal year, were at 13. 2 million, compared to about 12. 1 million last year. And that Million Dollars increase is primarily due to an increase in salaries. So next report that we have, the second report is the actual fiscal year 1819 which was last fiscal year, the year in the report. Basically the Controllers Office has not officially closed last fiscal year. But we have been monitoring the system and we noticed a lot of changes that we wanted to bring to you as timely as possible. If there are any other adjustments that are made, well come back if theyre major. This is a summary of where we are now. So for fiscal year 1819, basically for our revenues, we collected about 13. 4 million more than budget. So we came in at 84 million, compared to 80 million from last fiscal year. That increase is not because of our fee revenues going up, its primarily due to interest. So if in fiscal year 1819, we collected 4 million in interest, compared to 2. 4 million the prior fiscal year. And then also because of City Attorney litigation. We collected about 3 million in City Attorney litigations over last fiscal year. The takeaway is the revenues are higher, but not because of our fees. Our fees are pretty much normal, actually flat. Our fees are flat. We havent seen them going down yearoveryear, but they havent gone up either. Meaning our fees our fee revenue. On the expenditure side, we were at 71. 8 million versus 79 million in the prior year. And the reason that that is a little bit lower is primarily because we have a 10 million last year, we put about 10 million in our opep. We have the two reserves and weve funding one reserve at 100 and trying to get to 100 in the opep reserve. And that reserve is basically other postemployment benefits. Its like retiree for retiree funds that were setting aid side. And 10 million of that was moved last fiscal year. In the current in 1718, in 1819, we didnt need 10 million to be moved to that. So thats why it looks like were spending actually less. If you look at the actual salaries and other expenditures, were actually spending more. So what we have done with the Controllers Office, did do this year, is that instead of using money from our fee revenues, to funded remaining 5 million to get us to fully funding opep, they closed out old projects and used the old project money. Right now were fully funded at the full 32 million. Now we finally made it to be fully funded in both of reserves, that were actually set up maybe back in 2015 or so. So both are fully funded. And i think thats it. Overall revenues are leveling out. Theyre flat. And expenditures are going up slowly, primarily due to our expenditures in salaries. So im happy to answer any questions. See none. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, deputy. Clerk neck item is 7 b, update on proposed or recently enacted state or local legislation. Good morning, commissioners. Bill strausskahn, legislative and public affairs. I just hit a few of the highlights, based on the distribution that ive given you. We have the triinnial code renewal thats coming up. Actually met with supervisor peskin, chair of the landuse committee, just yesterday. Most of these i would say all of the code changes are coming, fall into that kind of technical correction notice, not particularly substantial. We expect it to be heard next week at land use. And im not expecting any difficulty there. So we should be in good time to make the end of the year, where we need to revoke the existing codes and adopt the new ones, with the San Francisco amendments. And then everything will start as of january 1. So good news is were on track with that. Also land use will be appear heating modification in the housing code, that supervisor peskin proposed. That, too, had a waiver of the 30day normal fee or time period. So that the board could consider it on a faster track. And that really has to do with changing the hours so that people dont find themselves in multiunit buildings, where the heat isnt on in the middle of the night. And this is based on some constituents going to supervisor peskin and saying, haney, at 3 00 in the morning, i cant get any heat here. So its a slight modification. Our housing Inspection Group has looked at it. And were quite supportive of moving that forward. The only other thing ill mention is the select dbi fee waivers on adus and 100 affordable actually did go into legal effect as of this past week. We had been putting notifications on both the website and at the counters to make people aware of this. I think right now we probably have a total of about 40 projects that probably fall into the pilot year period. As i think you may remember, it will run from june 1st of this year until sunny 1 june 1st of next year. And looking at the statistics, were able to gather and provide as a report to the board, the board will then make a decision about whether to extend this or to terminate it sometime next year. I think the only other thing ill mention is the soft story, as you know, with all of the the earthquake activity going on. The director has been busy doing interviews to talk about how successful the soft Story Program has been. And we are still in the midst of tier 4, which is about 1,000 buildings with a commercial spaces. And that has caused some ongoing difficulties for people in those buildings. Even though they were deliberately placed in tier 4 by the mayors original program, that started in 2013. In order to give people plenty of time to plan and so forth. There may be a need to extend that time period a bit. Weve had a request from the Small Business commission about that. So we are going to have some discussion and we are open obviously to try and work with the owners of those buildings to make sure we get to compliance. So with that, if you have any questions. Yes, sir. On the bdu and 100 affordable, the oneyear pilot, do we have some targets as to what will constitute success in raising the numbers . Or will that just be evaluated at a later date . There arent any goals from the Mayors Office, as the ordinance was proposed. I think the thought is that even if its limited to these four dbi fees, doesnt involve any other agency fees, as you know. That may or may not be enough incentive for a lot of people to understand that, yeah, we need more housing and adus are certainly one potential source of getting it. I think the idea from supervisor mar and some of the other supervisors is, they would like to see if even a limited incentive, such as were offering, stimulates more construction that way. Oh, sorry. Commissioner walker. Regarding the soft story, what is the current deadline scenario . Its past i believe. Yes. This past september was the deadline for everyone to have submitted permits. Right. Applications. They then have two years to complete. Okay. That work. And thats been true for each of the tiers. Right. And, you know, as the president mentioned in some of his earlier announcements, weve had a 98 compliance rate on the permit application, plans being submitted, were right now at about 65 to 70 completion rate. So we still have, especially in tiers 2 and 3, which were the larger number of buildings, 1500 and 3500 in each of those respective tiers, out of the nearly 5,000 buildings. So those are the ones that are still coming along. And, you know, some of those the time issue has been very active building environments. Hard to get contractors, hard to get engineers, et cetera. So we understand that. And we have deliberately tried to work with owners who are, you know, taking steps to move forward. Great. Thank you. Just commissioner moss. One of the one clarification. I know with the pending ordinance on the transfer of sros or residential hotels. I know that the report needs to be disclosed to the buyer. Is the report from dbi disclosed publicly to is there i just im not familiar with it. I was just wondering. Actually im not aware of that one myself. Id be happy to look into it. I think its probably more important for the public to know it, than the buyer. Id be happy to look into it and find out. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Strachan. Thank you, sir. Clerk next item is 7 c, update on major projects. All right. Good morning. Tom hui, department of the building inspection for the major project. The period is roughly increased by 4. 9 . Due to the filing of the permit, because the cochange. Cochange. Clerk okay. Our next item is 7 d, update on Code Enforcement. Good morning, commissioners. Ed swinney, Deputy Director inspection service. Im here to report on Code Enforcement activities and with dbis update of september 2019. For complaints received, 571. Complaint response within 24 to 72 hours, 568. Complaints of first notice of violations, set at 118. Complaints received and abated 288. Second notice of violations referred to Code Enforcement, 14. Housing inspection services, housing inspections performed, 906. Complaints received 341. Complaints responded in 72 hours, 320. Abated complaints and n. O. V. S 374. Number of cases sent to directors hearing, 34. Routine inspections, 127. Code enforcement services, number of cases sent to directors hearing, 139. Number of order abatements issues, 32. Number of cases under advisement, 14. Number of cases abated, 193. Code enforcement inspections performed, 203. Cases referred to bic litigation committee, two. And were not meeting with the City Attorney this month. Code enforcement outreach programs remains the same, because they report quarterly. And total people reached out 42,000 for the last quarter. Counseling cases for the last quarter. Community Program Participants 2,050, the last quarter. And cases resolved 173. Thank you, deputy. Thank you. Clerk okay. Is there any Public Comment on the directors report item 7ad. Okay. Seeing none, item 8, review and approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of september 18th, 2019. Move to approve. Clerk is there a second . Second. Clerk okay. Thank you. Is there any Public Comment on the minutes . Seeing none, all commissioners in favor . Aye. Any opposed . The minutes are approved. Okay. Our next items are were going to call both items together, prior to going into closed session. The first item is item 9, discussion and possible action on the annual performance evaluation for the director, continued from the september 18th, 2019, bic meeting. And then the next item is item 10, discussion and possible action on conference with legal counsel. Is there any Public Comment on agenda items 9 or 10 . Okay. Seeing none, we are now in closed session. It a way of life in San Francisco. When the next major quake hits, the city hopes a new law requiring seismic upgrades to five story buildings will help keep more residents safe and sound. Tell me a little about the soft Story Program. What is it . Its a program the mayor signed into law about a year and a half ago and the whole idea behind it was to help homeowners strengthen buildings so that they would not collapse. Did you the soft Story Program apply to all buildings or building that were built in a certain time frame . It only applies to buildings built in the time frame of 1978 and earlier. Its aimed at wood framed buildings that are three or more stories and five or more units. But the openings at the garage level and the street level arent supported in many buildings. And without the support durin