DBI presents proposed FY2021–22 budget; commissioners press on fee waivers and staffing

SAN FRANCISCO — The Department of Building Inspection on Jan. 29 presented its proposed fiscal‑year 2021–22 budget to the Building Inspection Commission, laying out revenue and expenditure forecasts and answering commissioners’ questions about fee waivers, staffing and carryforward project funds.

Deputy Director Tyrus Maddison opened the special meeting with a revenue‑first presentation, saying DBI is funded entirely by fees and therefore is not subject to general‑fund reductions the Mayor has ordered for other departments. "As a special fund department, DBI is completely funded by fees so that doesn't apply to us," Maddison said.

Why it matters: DBI’s operating revenue is concentrated in valuation‑based plan‑checking and building‑permit fees, which Maddison said together make up about 59% of department revenue. Because those revenues depend on construction valuation rather than counts, the department’s finances are sensitive to large projects and multi‑year timelines.

Key numbers: Maddison said the department is projecting about $69 million in revenues for the budget period while detailed expenditures total about $87.5 million, producing a proposed use of roughly $17 million from DBI’s fund balance to balance the budget. He also flagged uncertainty in interest earnings: the budget currently counts about $985,000 in interest revenue while last fiscal year DBI collected more than $3 million; Maddison said DBI will return with refined interest estimates. (The transcript contained a numeric transcription error that listed interest at $985,000,000; the department’s slides and context indicate the intended figure is $985,000.)

Fee waivers and timing: Maddison noted the new 100% affordable and ADU fee‑waiver program implemented in October will reduce fee revenue and that impacts may play out across multiple fiscal years because large projects’ valuations and permit issuance can span several years. "We're going to be working with MIS to run some reports to see what the current impact is," he said.

Expenditures and program priorities: Salary and fringe benefits make up the bulk of DBI’s spending (about 58%); services of other departments account for roughly 26% of the budget. Maddison said professional services are increasing to finance a fee study (the last was done in 2015) and to support IT upgrades. He said DBI plans to replace about 15 vehicles this year as part of fleet greening and to acquire records‑management equipment.

One‑time items: Maddison said a large reduction in services of other departments reflects the end of one‑time work orders tied to the 49 South Van Ness move and setup, including a previously budgeted $7.6 million work order that will not recur.

Questions from commissioners: Commissioners pressed several operational points. Commissioner Moss asked whether DBI can parse the revenue impact of affordable‑housing projects and the fee waivers; Maddison said the permitting system tags waived projects and that staff can report what fees were waived and return with that information.

Staffing concerns drew sustained attention. A commissioner said permit‑technician staffing has fallen sharply from historical levels and warned of impacts on processes such as lien administration for landlords who fail to meet housing obligations. Maddison acknowledged long‑term staffing losses tied to the 2008 downturn, described attrition adjustments used in budgeting, and said DBI will re‑examine attrition assumptions and backfill positions where possible to support housing and code‑enforcement workloads.

Project funds and litigation: Commissioners asked about a multiyear IT project (referred to in the meeting as the ACELA project) and whether project reserves remain available. Maddison said project funds were set aside and typically carry forward; he estimated roughly $3 million was reserved for the project but deferred to the Department of Technology for contract details. Attorney Rob Capulet (introduced in the transcript as "WCT attorney Rob Capulet") said he would need to review contracts to determine how attorney fees and litigation costs would be apportioned.

Next steps and outcome: Maddison told the commission DBI will present updated revenue figures and adjustments at the next special meeting on Feb. 13; the department’s budget is due to the Controller and Mayor’s office on Feb. 21 and the Mayor will submit the budget on May 1. No vote on the DBI budget was taken Jan. 29. The commission adjourned by voice vote at 10:42 a.m.

Notes: All quotes and figures are taken from the DBI presentation and commissioners’ remarks at the Jan. 29 special meeting. Where the transcript contained an apparent numeric transcription error for interest, the article uses the corrected, context‑consistent figure and notes the discrepancy.