Public hearing on sidewalk-repair assessments draws complaints from property owners

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors convened a combined committee hearing on sidewalk‑inspection and accelerated sidewalk‑abatement assessments and heard public objections from multiple property owners who said the city’s repair process lacked adequate notice, produced poor workmanship or placed undue costs on adjacent property owners.

Michael Lennon, speaking for the Department of Public Works, explained the two programs: the proactive Sidewalk Inspection and Repair Program (SIRP), which inspects city sidewalks on a 25‑year rolling basis and issues invoices to adjacent property owners for required repairs, and the reactive Accelerated Sidewalk Abatement Program (ASAP), used to abate hazards and bill property owners when necessary. Lennon said the city issued 791 invoices under SIRP this year, with roughly 97% paid after notice; the department sought to add 30 unpaid SIRP invoices totaling $44,438.80 to the property tax roll, including a 12% administrative fee. For the ASAP program the department reported 141 invoices this year, with 118 paid and a request to add 23 unpaid invoices totaling $46,969.16.

Several property owners testified that they had received large bills for repairs they said were caused by utility work or city actions, that repairs completed by city contractors had cracked shortly after work, or that they had experienced poor communications from DPW. One speaker described a decades‑old dispute dating to 2007 in which he said the department had promised repairs that were never completed. Another property owner said the work on his building produced cracks within a week and splattered concrete on the façade; he told the board he had not been given a substantive reply despite prior contacts with staff.

Supervisors asked DPW to confirm responsibilities in categories such as utility‑owned vaults, tree‑root damage and city‑initiated excavation. Lennon reiterated that state law and the municipal code assign most sidewalk‑repair responsibility to adjacent property owners, but noted exceptions where utilities or the city (for certain tree‑root issues under a local initiative) are responsible. DPW staff said they had coordinated with the Bureau of Urban Forestry on tree basins and potential plantings when they plan repair work.

After public comment and consultations with several property owners in the hallway, DPW said it had not reached agreements with all owners and requested the board proceed with the assessment roll as submitted. The board approved the reports on assessment costs for the remaining properties and instructed DPW staff to meet with property owners outside the chamber to resolve outstanding issues where possible.