Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permitting Digital Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City approves front-end update to online permitting to reduce misfiled applications
Summary
Crown Point authorized implementation of a guided front-end for its EnerGov permitting and licensing portal, with a one-time $4,500 setup fee and $6,612 annual cost, to reduce incorrect applications and ease staff workload.
The Crown Point Board of Works voted May 7 to implement a guided public-facing front end for the city’s EnerGov permitting and licensing system aimed at reducing misfiled applications and staff workload.
City planning and permitting staff said the new interface will ask applicants branching questions to guide them to the correct license or permit type before submission. "What we're hoping for is that this front end solution, when someone goes to submit an application, they kind of answer questions, and these questions branch out and guide the applicant to the proper license or to the proper permit," Bart, a city staff member, told the board.
Why it matters: Staff said many applicants choose the wrong license or permit, creating extra work for the building department and clerk-treasurer’s office. The guided interface is intended to reduce back-and-forth and incorrect filings.
Cost and process: The implementation carries a one-time setup fee of $4,500 to work with Thalo Technologies and an annual recurring charge of $6,612 that would attach to the Tyler Technologies invoice; staff said the initial implementation cost will be covered by the building department. The board approved the intergov add-on request as presented.
How it will work: Staff explained applicants create accounts and must upload required verification documents — for example, bonds or identification — before license approval. Contractors must be city-licensed to access the permit workflow; unlicensed contractors cannot start the permitting process until they complete licensing requirements.
Discussion vs. decision: The board approved the implementation request; staff and department leads (including building department staff) will oversee setup and monitor whether the interface reduces incorrect applications. Staff said they will continue administrative approvals for unchanged applications and return to the board if complaints or substantial changes arise.
Ending: The board approved the implementation and directed staff to proceed; Bart and building department staff will track outcomes and report back if the change requires further board action.
