S.F. supes probe building inspectors’ practices
The ongoing corruption scandal that has roiled the Department of Building Inspection, leading to resignations and at least one federal indictment, boiled over at a Board of Supervisors committee meeting Monday as board members grilled city staff about one
particularly egregious project in the city’s Portola District.
The hearing, called by Supervisor Hillary Ronen, concerned 2869-2899 San Bruno Ave., where a developer illegally crammed 29 apartments into a housing complex that was approved for just 10 units, according to the city. Final inspections in that project were signed off on by former Senior Inspector Bernie Curran, who last month was hit
with federal wire fraud charges in a scheme where he allegedly gave preferential treatment to a politically connected contractor in exchange for contributions to youth sports organizations Curran supported.
In a $1.2 million settlement with the San Bruno Avenue developer, the office of City Attorney Dennis Herrera alleges that the developer violated multiple building codes and state housing laws in constructing the 2016 apartment complex. They failed to include the below-market rate unit required by city law; kitchens and bathrooms were added without permits; and the building lacked the required second exit for tenants in case of a fire. Instead of two units in each of the five connected buildings, they built six units in four and five in another, according to the city.
On Monday Acting Department of Building Inspection Director Patrick O’Riordan said that Curran claimed to have done the inspections on the property, but never entered the reports into the city’s haphazard permit tracking system,
instead scrawling the results on the project “job card,” which has gone missing. He said it is unclear whether Curran actually inspected the property, or just signed on seven inspections without actually going there and reviewing the work.
“We have to work on the assumption those inspections were not performed,” O’Riordan said.
O’Riordan told the Board of Supervisors committee that Curran claimed to have been asked to do the inspection by former DBI Director Tom Hui.
On Monday Ronen also criticized the City Attorney’s Office for what she called a “weak settlement” of $1.2 million in the case. If the 19 unpermitted units were renting for $3,000 apiece, as The Chronicle reported, revenues from the illegal apartments would exceed $500,000 a year.
Ronen called the settlement “barely a slap on the wrist that doesn’t do anything to stop this from happening again.” She said the city could have included punitive measures, like making sure their contractor’s license was revoked by the state.
“This settlement is not
protecting the tenants, it’s not protecting the city, and it’s not setting any precedent or helping us in getting the bad guys’ license revoked,” she said.
Deputy City Attorney Peter Keith, who works on code enforcement cases, said the settlement “compared favorably” with what the city would have won in damages had the case gone to court.
Supervisor Aaron Peskin said the case is another example of why corruption flourishes in the DBI — those caught from the private sector get off with light punishment while crooked public sector workers simply leave their job with their fat pensions intact.
“The worst thing that happens is you lose your job,” he said. “If you made enough money being a crook, it might be a risk worth taking.”
The hearing shed some light on how far-reaching Curran’s influence was throughout the department. In an agency where the typical senior inspector would do 25 or 30 final inspections a year, Curran did as many as 300. While other senior inspectors stayed within the geographical boundaries they were charged with overseeing, Curran
was Zelig-like in his ability to pop up all over the city, consistently performing inspections for well-connected builders with a history of flouting building codes.
“Those extra 270 inspections were done for a reason,” said Supervisor Myrna Melgar. “I don’t think he went out there and did them for the heck of it.”
Peskin said that other departments have improved or deteriorated during his two decades in public office, but that DBI has remained a bastion of corruption, rewarding those who turn a blind eye to favoritism and cronyism, despite periodic efforts to reform its culture.
O’Riordan said he is trying to change the department.
“The vast majority of our staff are good, hardworking, honest people,” he said. “If there are any bad apples still here we will find them and take action.”
Peskin didn’t seem convinced.
“I have heard those words before,” he said.