A Question About The Role of Building Departments

[jar546]

Is the current administration of building codes more about generating revenue for municipalities than ensuring public safety and compliance?

Some states, such as Florida, California & Colorado have specific language that prohibits the use of Building Department funds for General Fund expenses.

 

[bill1952]

In my area, I don't think the fees generate income to cover the cost of the one of person department. Seems mostly about protecting property values through zoning and property maintenance codes.

It would seem difficult to generate income outside of urban and large suburban communities with lots of growth.

 

[jj1289]

The original intent was for the fees to supplement the expenses of the department. That is why ICC publishes the building valuation information on a quarterly basis.

Many states and municipalities do not permit the use of enterprise funds so all revenue goes to the general fund.

This revenues v expenses is a tough balancing act.

From the 2021 IBC;

[A] 101.3 Purpose. The purpose of this code is to establish
the minimum requirements to provide a reasonable level of
safety, health and general welfare through structural
strength, means of egress, stability, sanitation, light and
ventilation, energy conservation, and for providing a reasonable
level of life safety and property protection from the
hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions, and to
provide a reasonable level of safety to fire fighters and emergency
responders during emergency operations.

 

[mtlogcabin]

24.301.203 FUNDING OF CODE ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

(1) The establishment of permit fees shall be left to the city, county, or town. A list of current permit fees must be submitted to the department when the fees are first established or subsequently amended.

(2) Permit fees must only be used for those costs related to building code enforcement activities, except for the building codes education fund as provided in 50-60-116, MCA, with building codes being only those codes adopted by the department in subchapters 1, 3, 4, and 15 of ARM Title 24, chapter 301. It is not intended that permit fees be used to support fire departments, planning, zoning, or other activities, except to the extent that employees in those programs provide direct plan review, inspection, or other building code enforcement services for the city, county, or town's building code enforcement programs. Permit fees shall not be used to support the inspection of existing buildings for maintenance or for abatement of dangerous buildings.

(5) Permit fees collected in a given year in excess of the costs of administering city, county, or town building code enforcement programs shall be placed in reserve to be used in subsequent years, provided that the reserve amount does not exceed the amount needed to support the building code enforcement programs for 12 months. Fees must be reduced if necessary to avoid creation of excess reserve.

After 6 years the reserve amount was finally extended to 36 months.

 

[e hilton]

From my perspective, i think the fees are reasonable, and i can’t image that they cover the salaries if the county staff. Used to be that the county asked for a cost of construction to use in setting the fees, and yo7 wrote in a number. Now they wantba copy of the gc proposal.

 

[ICE]

Building departments that are large such as LA County lose money. That's because they have so many redundant employees that have maxed out on the pay scale. Small cities that get by on the cheap manage to make money operating a building department. I have never heard of a building department having a sale because they took in too much money. I recall some years ago a local AHJ was sued and had to cut back on expenditures for new vehicles. But that is extremely rare.

Planning departments can rake in the money... and there's others with some hefty fees.

 

[phillier937]

Is the current administration of building codes more about generating revenue for municipalities than ensuring public safety and compliance?

Some states, such as Florida, California & Colorado have specific language that prohibits the use of Building Department funds for General Fund expenses.

I think fees are very reasonable and certainly do not cover our costs. Not set for revenue but public safety. $100 for a tent - that covers a CBO, Zoning and Fire Marshal review as well as an inspection. The reason I bring this example up is this failure that happened last night before we could get it inspected thankfully before it was in use.

Some are artificially low to encourage use - solar panels at $45 barely covers the time to open up the files.

 

[SCBO1]

The BD usually try's to break even, but most mini's I've worked for dump the fees in the general and end up giving it to the first guys, FD and PD, they need new equipment. We get some scraps now and then if we put it in the budget for computer software or training and a shirt now and then so we don't look bummy!

 

[e hilton]

I think fees are very reasonable and certainly do not cover our costs. Not set for revenue but public safety. $100 for a tent - that covers a CBO, Zoning and Fire Marshal review as well as an inspection. The reason I bring this example up is this failure that happened last night before we could get it inspected thankfully before it was in use.

Some are artificially low to encourage use - solar panels at $45 barely covers the time to open up the files.

View attachment 11206

Would your inspection have prevented that?

 

[phillier937]

Would your inspection have prevented that?

Probably not - I'm just glad we have them and require high wind action plans.