Council delays action on Certificate of Compliance fee changes after extensive debate and requests for cost data

The Ithaca Common Council heard extended discussion and pushback on a proposed amendment to City Code chapter 210, article 7, section 210.43 that would revise Certificate of Compliance (CFC) fees for housing inspections. Council members expressed concerns about the fee structure, the relative costs assigned to university-owned dormitories versus private multiunit housing, and whether the proposed schedule recovers city costs.

Rob Feldewall of the building division and (in-person) Director Nicholas presented the ordinance revisions and defended the approach as an effort to align fees with the anticipated staff time required to process applications, conduct inspections and issue certificates. "The dollars that were, the dollar fee schedule that was created is really just it's basically a representation of what we expect to expend as as an inspector in this process," Feldewall said.

Key technical and financial points: Staff said the building division employs 16 people overall and that the housing inspection program has five housing inspectors; one inspector is assigned full time to Cornell campus and Cornell Heights. The department's permitting and inspection fees were described as covering division costs: a staff speaker said the department collected over $2,000,000 in fees this year across programs.

Council concerns and proposed changes: Several council members said the proposed fee structure places a relatively lower per-unit burden on larger buildings and on dormitories compared with small multiunit properties and older housing stock. Alderson Kiel urged a progressive approach to fees so smaller landlords and older properties would not be charged disproportionately. Several members asked staff to provide a clearer breakdown of the division's direct and indirect costs (salaries, benefits, overhead, vehicle and travel time) and an accounting of current revenue from inspection fees, specifically how much Cornell pays annually and how much the housing-inspection program recovers.

Examples from the proposal and enforcement tools: Staff said a reinspection fee is proposed at $75 per hour with a one-hour minimum and that holdover-violation fees were increased in draft language (the presenter said the prior $5 violations were doubled to $10 and some other holdover amounts increased to $50). Staff emphasized that the program seeks voluntary compliance through inspections and certification rather than relying solely on fines; the city attorney and council discussed prosecuting persistent noncompliance as an enforcement tool.

Motion and procedural outcome: Council debated tabling the ordinance to allow staff to return with additional information. A motion to table the item failed on a 5—25 tie, and subsequent parliamentary motions to reconsider did not pass; no ordinance adoption vote occurred at the meeting. Councilmembers and staff agreed that additional financial detail and a clearer fee justification should be provided before the council takes a final vote. Staff also noted the division intended to launch an online permitting and CFC registration workflow in OpenGov and had planned to align a fee schedule with that launch in February.

Next steps: Council requested the building division and city attorney provide a more detailed cost breakdown (including program-specific revenue, inspector time allocations and enforcement costs) and return with a revised proposal or supporting memo. Several council members volunteered to collaborate with staff on a revised structure if they can convene outside the full council meeting to draft specific policy amendments for consideration.