04-05-2012, 07:15 AM
I agree with Kapohocat -- where are the other candidates, and where is Billy on this??? He's running for re-election. Seems to me this is an ideal time for him to show some progress and responsiveness.
James, a pleasure to see your responsiveness as usual, but none of the candidates from District 5 or Billy (or his opponent) have weighed in on this issue.
On a note of personal preference, I think privatization is a bad idea for building code enforcement and plans checking. This is one of the areas that is an essential area of county regulation, needs one set of standards with oversight and best kept central, and not a $$ making mechanism for a private firm. Reminds us of the home inspection businesses which, if not scams, are often shown to be inadequate. With a private firm, if at a later time you discover problems, all you can do is not recommend them or sue. With government you at least have the potential of going up the hierarchy and redoing the issue.
Also, it's not necessarily the people who interact with the building dept. every day that are to be listened to. It's how they treat the owner-builders that would show the caliber of the county organization. They already give preferential treatment (a full-time plans checker) to commercial builders, but what about us little folk?
And on a related issue...There's a plethora of un-permitted residential properties in this county, going up literally around us. The county should be doing everything they can to encourage getting permits, not making it such an onerous ordeal. In our area alone, there are several significant structures going up without permits. Yet we get punished with huge delays for trying to play by the rules.
Jane
James, a pleasure to see your responsiveness as usual, but none of the candidates from District 5 or Billy (or his opponent) have weighed in on this issue.
On a note of personal preference, I think privatization is a bad idea for building code enforcement and plans checking. This is one of the areas that is an essential area of county regulation, needs one set of standards with oversight and best kept central, and not a $$ making mechanism for a private firm. Reminds us of the home inspection businesses which, if not scams, are often shown to be inadequate. With a private firm, if at a later time you discover problems, all you can do is not recommend them or sue. With government you at least have the potential of going up the hierarchy and redoing the issue.
Also, it's not necessarily the people who interact with the building dept. every day that are to be listened to. It's how they treat the owner-builders that would show the caliber of the county organization. They already give preferential treatment (a full-time plans checker) to commercial builders, but what about us little folk?
And on a related issue...There's a plethora of un-permitted residential properties in this county, going up literally around us. The county should be doing everything they can to encourage getting permits, not making it such an onerous ordeal. In our area alone, there are several significant structures going up without permits. Yet we get punished with huge delays for trying to play by the rules.
Jane