Rockwall County debates hiring a fire marshal, funding and enforcement powers

Rockwall County officials discussed adding a fire marshal position to a newly forming Development Services office during the county's June 25 budget workshop, touching on duties, enforcement powers, funding sources and whether the role should be full time.

Miss Erica Bridges, who is leading the Development Services reorganization, said the county lacks in-house expertise on the International Fire Code and related plan review and inspection duties. "This is a specialized area of expertise that we're lacking currently in my opinion," Bridges told the court, describing plan review, inspections and consultation work the county has been outsourcing.

Health coordinator Carissa (last name not given in the transcript) said a locally hired fire marshal would add enforcement capacity the county currently lacks. Carissa described the position as a peace officer in some jurisdictions and said that would permit stronger enforcement actions such as notices of violation or stop-work orders that staff without that authority cannot issue.

Commissioners and staff debated where the position should sit. Bridges proposed placing the fire marshal within Development Services alongside GIS and environmental health, while some commissioners raised the possibility of the sheriff providing the function or sharing duties. Bridges said she preferred to house the position in Development Services while allowing the marshal to assist the sheriff on investigations when needed.

Funding and offset questions were prominent. Commissioners and staff noted the county currently contracts some fire- and building-code reviews to Bureau Veritas and that developers pay associated fees into a dedicated account. Council discussion referenced a "fire code enforcement" fund (Fund 30) and a separate public safety sales tax fund; Bridges said Fund 30's balance is "under $200,000" and might not sustain a position long term but could possibly pay for equipment or part of implementation costs. Court members asked staff to analyze how much of the fees now paid to Bureau Veritas would remain with the county if the county took the work in‑house and whether fee schedules would need to change.

There was also debate about whether to hire a full-time marshal now or start part time. Bridges said workload varies and "there's going to be ebbs and flows," adding that a part-time hire might be adequate initially but that at times the county could need multiple marshals. Commissioners suggested exploring shared arrangements with the sheriff or other local agencies and looking for applicants with fire department experience; Bridges and others noted many fire marshals come from fire departments and bring that field experience.

The court further discussed one-time and recurring costs: badges, uniforms, vehicles and other capital needs. At least two vehicles were discussed as likely needs if the position is created. Commissioners asked staff to review the legal authorities the county would need to ensure any local regulations could be enforced using new modeling, maps or code interpretations, and a judge requested detailed follow-up in a non-public venue to avoid diving into statutes in open session.

No formal motion or vote occurred; commissioners directed staff to return with analyses on: whether Fund 30 or other fees could help offset costs, how much the county currently pays Bureau Veritas annually, whether fee schedules would require modification if the county assumed reviews, and an estimate of full- and part-time salary costs and capital needs.

The discussion combined program design, legal and budget questions and concluded with a staff follow-up assignment rather than a decision to create the position immediately.