Commission updates Board of Rules and Appeals ordinance, removes commission approval step for board procedure and asks staff to pursue county discipline option

The City Commission on Jan. 6 approved changes to Chapter 11 (buildings and building regulations) affecting the Board of Rules and Appeals. Assistant City Attorney Joe Mladnik said the draft ordinance was principally "housekeeping" to make the board functional and to remove provisions that were rarely used.

"This ordinance is primarily, really housekeeping on the ordinance," Mladnik said, explaining the changes would reduce board membership, adjust quorum and meeting frequency and remove provisions that had allowed the board to conduct contractor discipline though the city has historically pursued contractor enforcement through other channels.

Building official Larry Murphy and other staff described the practical problem: the current ordinance required a large board and three consumer representatives for contractor discipline — a configuration that created scheduling and quorum problems and had never resulted in contractor discipline under the existing rules. Murphy said equipment and code enforcement functions continue through existing city code enforcement, police referrals and state licensing.

The commission debated whether to preserve board contractor discipline locally or rely on state and county avenues. Mladnik noted other avenues exist: criminal prosecution, civil claims and state licensing complaints to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and the Construction Industry Licensing Board.

Commissioner Ulrich moved to approve the ordinance as amended and to strike the sentence that would require commission approval of the board's rules of procedure; Commissioner Bati seconded. The motion passed unanimously.

Separately, the commission voted unanimously on a motion directing staff to pursue a relationship with Sarasota County (including examining whether the city can opt into the county ordinance) to address contractor discipline rather than immediately instating a full local disciplinary regime that would require additional staffing, legal resources and budget.

Why it matters: the ordinance change reduces the board's size and procedural friction, clarifies the board's role to hear appeals of the building official and removes a requirement that would have required the commission to approve the board's procedural rules. The commission also directed staff to explore whether joining the county's approach to contractor discipline is feasible — a step commissioners said could be less costly than creating a local adjudicatory discipline program.

Next steps: staff will finalize ordinance language for second reading and will return with options for an interlocal or opt‑in approach with the county regarding contractor discipline, plus any budget implications if the commission opts to build a local disciplinary apparatus.