Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges tougher penalties for code violators; DBI enforcement numbers presented
Summary
A public commenter urged the Building Inspection Commission to raise financial penalties for code violations after presenting DBI data; DBI staff later presented December enforcement statistics showing inspections, NOVs and abatement activity.
At the Building Inspection Commission meeting on Jan. 15, resident Jerry Drattler urged the commission to overhaul DBI enforcement and penalties, citing data he obtained from the department and arguing current fines are too small to deter wealthy property owners.
"I doubt assessing an average penalty of $13.73 dollars against the average home value of $1,300,000 deters contractors and developers from violating the San Francisco building code," Drattler told commissioners, citing his analysis of notices of violation (NOVs) and penalties across several years.
Drattler said DBI received 4,881 building code complaints in 2017–18, and that he obtained an electronic file showing 1,517 NOVs over the last four years. He said the department charged him $1,934.40 for the records request and asked for a refund because he needed the data to prepare his report.
DBI presented December enforcement statistics later in the meeting. Deputy Director Ed Sweeney reported building inspections performed for the month totaled 4,828 and housing inspections totaled 827. Sweeney also reported complaint response metrics, NOV issuances, abated cases and the number of cases sent to the director's hearing and to the city attorney; staff said outreach programs reached thousands of residents in quarterly reporting.
Commissioners did not take immediate legislative action on Drattler's request but discussed enforcement capacity and the distribution of penalties. Several commissioners and staff noted that higher penalties for severe or repeated violations can require court processes and that enforcement tools differ by code section, inspection type and legal thresholds.
The meeting record did not show an immediate change in policy; commissioners and staff indicated the matter could be pursued as part of enforcement or budgetary follow‑up work.
