Abatement Appeals Board unanimously denies jurisdiction on two San Bruno Avenue/1265 Gerard Street appeals after residents cite poor conditions

SAN FRANCISCO — The Abatement Appeals Board on Wednesday unanimously denied two requests from Richard Thomas asking the board to reclaim jurisdiction over longstanding code-enforcement matters affecting multiple properties on San Bruno Avenue and 1265 Gerard Street.

Rosemary Bosque, Chief Housing Inspector, told the panel the department provided an updated staff report and an Attachment A table detailing the violations and assessments and urged the board not to take jurisdiction. "We strongly urge you on the basis of all that is before you that there isn't proper information that the appellant has given you to be able to take jurisdiction of this case," Bosque said.

The two items were continuances and each side was allotted three minutes. In the first matter the staff briefing and commissioners' follow-up review showed multiple outstanding abatement orders. Bosque pointed to the exhibits and said the record included several orders of abatement for the properties under appeal.

Attorney David Barry, representing the owner and Environment and Land Management, said the owner had retained counsel and contractors and "it's the plan of Mister Thomas to clear all violations." Barry described meetings with department staff and contractors and said some penalties may be negotiable once violations are cleared.

During public comment, resident Gerald Green said he had lived at one of the buildings for four years and described ongoing problems: rotten windows, hot-water issues and what he called repeated delays on repairs and permits. "This has been going on for 4 years...I've been there 4 years suffering," Green said.

Tony Robles of Senior and Disability Action urged the board and city agencies to address conditions that affect seniors and people with disabilities, warning that some windows had been bolted shut and could impede emergency access. "Housing and health are very much intertwined," Robles said, urging code and building-inspection remedies including an ordinance through DBI to require basic accessibility fixtures in SROs.

Richard Thomas, the appellant and owner of record, told the board he had historical documentation showing the building existed in 1919 and that gas service was active in 1915; he said he had a building permit to replace windows but that outstanding violations and associated fees had blocked permitting and lawful repair in the past.

Commissioner Walker moved to deny the request for jurisdiction in the first case, saying the appellant had not shown legal grounds — such as a city misrepresentation or error — to undo the missed appeal deadlines. Commissioners noted that one property had nine orders of abatement assessed and that the filings had been delayed or handled by third-party representatives who did not follow up timelier. The motion carried on a unanimous roll call.

The second matter, for case number 6774355664 (San Bruno Avenue, also listed as 1265 Gerard Street), followed the same pattern: staff reiterated that the record did not provide a legal reason to take jurisdiction, Barry and the appellant repeated their explanations about historical use and permit issues, and commissioners concluded there had been no legal basis to reopen jurisdiction. A motion to deny jurisdiction carried unanimously on roll call.

The board did not order any on-the-record relief or changes to the underlying abatements; commissioners repeatedly directed that enforcement and remediation coordination remain with department inspectors and staff. The meeting record shows penalties and assessments in the appeals package, including cited past penalties of $2,300 on a permit-approval matter and other accumulated fees the appellant described as totaling about $20,000 in combined charges and repeated cost assessments.

The Abatement Appeals Board adjourned at 9:40 a.m.; members announced a roughly ten-minute recess before reconvening as the Building Inspection Commission.

What’s next: The matters were denied jurisdiction by the AAB; the department retains enforcement authority and the owner indicated plans to pursue remediation and permitting with staff.