Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dbi Record Alterations Whistleblower topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenter urges written city‑attorney opinion and whistleblower transparency over alleged DBI record changes
Summary
At the committee’s public‑comment period, a former county grand juror and retired CPA alleged Department of Building Inspection (DBI) staff altered permit‑tracking records and urged the committee to request a city‑attorney opinion and more transparent whistleblower disclosures.
Jerry Drowler, a former civil grand juror and retired certified public accountant, raised allegations during the committee’s public comment period that the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection (DBI) altered records in the department’s permit tracking system and that whistleblower complaints are not being disclosed as currently promised.
Drowler said the city controller’s August 2024 report “falsely claims” DBI implemented all internal control recommendations. He told the committee that, based on his review, DBI management approved 51 after‑the‑fact alterations in the permit tracking system during October–December 2024 and cited approvals by named DBI chiefs: 23 approvals by Chief Building Inspector Kevin Birmingham, 21 by Chief Plumbing Inspector Steve Pinelli and seven by Chief Electrical Inspector Kenneth Burke. He described such changes as altering public records and recommended the committee request a written legal opinion from the city attorney on the practice.
Why it matters: The committee oversees general obligation (GO) bond programs and receives public comment on issues within its jurisdiction. Drowler framed the alleged record alterations and the handling of whistleblower reports as matters that affect oversight, public transparency and public trust in building‑safety enforcement.
Drowler also urged the committee to seek confirmation from the city attorney about the comptroller’s non‑disclosure position on whistleblower outcomes and recommended that the newly created San Francisco Inspector General not report to the comptroller, arguing the comptroller lacks independence. He said DBI had acknowledged it did not publish an altered‑records log and that penalty fees to deter building code noncompliance had been excluded from a fee study and therefore not increased.
The committee did not take action during public comment. No city official provided a response on the record during the public‑comment period.
