Don Crandall, executive vice president for government relations at the Michigan Home Builders Association, briefed the committee on recent code developments and said his association prefers the 2024 Michigan Residential Code (MRC) over the 2021 promulgation that the department has moved to adopt. "We are currently operating under the 2015 Michigan residential code," Crandall said, summarizing the current status and the department's recent actions. He explained the process by which the International Codes Council (ICC) develops model codes and how states adopt and adapt those codes.

Nut graf: The association said the 2021 MRC contains mandatory measures (for example, 2x6 framing, R-60 ceiling insulation, insulated exterior sheathing and mandatory solar readiness in places) that they view as prescriptive, while the 2024 model uses a points-based approach intended to allow flexibility and innovation (heat pumps, high-performance windows, etc.). Crandall told the committee "Studies show that the 2024, MRC would save 6 to 8% more energy than the 2021 code," and he urged either adoption of 2024 or restoration of the prior advisory-committee promulgation process the industry previously relied on.

Crandall described process concerns. He said the department's newer rulemaking approach, implemented after Executive Order 2017-3, reduced stakeholder advisory committees and now proceeds largely through internal staff and the boards/commissions. He said the Home Builders Association filed a notice of intent to sue on May 1 after the department sent the 2021 code and the part 10 Michigan Uniform Energy Code to the Office of the Great Seal; the association objected on statutory-authority, arbitrary-and-capricious and undue-burden grounds. Crandall said the association supports the 2024 MRC because it was developed under ANSI processes and allows multiple compliance paths so builders may meet energy goals with different technologies rather than prescriptive single measures.

Committee members pressed Crandall on costs and consumer impacts. He said the energy portion of code changes is subject to a state requirement that energy-related measures demonstrate a seven-year payback. He also cited a national study his association uses that estimates "every time a new code goes into place, the average is about $10,000 to the cost of a home." Members discussed whether the department performed required fiscal-impact analyses and whether the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) could have advanced the 2024 code earlier; Crandall said a JCAR meeting to consider the 2024 code lacked a quorum on the fifteenth day and that senate members did not attend, after which the 2021 code proceeded to the great seal.

Ending: Crandall urged either executive action to rescind EO 2017-3 and restore advisory committees for the Michigan residential code, or legislative fixes to reinstate that stakeholder process; in the meantime, the Home Builders Association has filed notice of litigation and said it will seek injunction relief if the 2021 and part 10 rules remain in force. No committee votes on code adoption occurred during the hearing.