Residents urge Batavia council to revisit contractor-registration ordinance after incomplete deck work

Sherry and Rick Neidhart, Batavia residents, told the City Council on Aug. 4 that a contractor left their deck unfinished, installed stairs that failed inspection and — they allege — removed his name from their permit without their knowledge. The Neidharts asked the council to adopt a contractor-registration ordinance they said would require basic “guardrails” such as insurance and bonding and would not be a city “preferred list.” They referenced a 2016 memo by a community development director that they said analyzed registration options and urged council members to review that material before deciding whether to pursue new rules. The request matters because Batavia’s building-permit process assigns code and safety responsibilities to the city while consumer protections such as recovering losses from an unscrupulous contractor typically fall to homeowners via civil remedies. The Neidharts said their inspector failed the staircase and they are considering a civil suit; they urged the city to adopt a registration that would make insurance and bonding information available to staff. The Neidharts described their case in detail: they obtained a permit; they say the contractor obtained and later told them he removed his name from the permit; an inspector concluded the stairs were not to code; and the contractor walked off the job without completing work or leaving needed materials. Rick Neidhart said he later saw the same contractor working on another house six doors down while the Neidharts’ deck remained incomplete. City staff acknowledged there are limits to what the city can do in a private-contract dispute and described the immediate code response as enforcement of applicable permit and inspection requirements. A staff member said the contractor had not built what was on the approved plan and that the matter is both contractual and code enforcement, noting the inspector had failed the stairs. Council members and staff repeatedly raised practical questions about how a registration program would be administered and enforced, including whether the city would be able to block future permits after a single complaint and how to handle contractors with problem histories in other jurisdictions. Multiple council members and staff asked that the 2016 memo be circulated for review. A council member and staff said they will email the 2016 report and consider placing the matter on a future Committee of the Whole agenda for further discussion; no ordinance was proposed or adopted at the Aug. 4 meeting. The Neidharts said they will pursue civil remedies if necessary and said they will collect signatures to press the issue locally. Council members urged homeowners to document problems, file police reports when appropriate, and work with building inspectors when permit conditions are not met. The city clerk and building staff offered to continue direct follow-up with the Neidharts on the open permit.