Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Code Enforcement Notification topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate committee debates requiring complainants receive copy of code‑enforcement compliance orders
Summary
The committee discussed S.6368, which would require local code enforcement to provide a complainant with a copy of a compliance order when a complaint results in an order. Senators raised fiscal and operational questions for small municipalities and asked the Secretary of State to provide rulemaking guidance.
The State Senate Committee on Housing, Construction and Community Development on April 28 discussed S.6368, a bill that would require local code enforcement authorities to provide complainants a copy of any compliance order issued after a complaint alleging a violation of the Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code.
Senator Cleare (committee transcript spelling varies) offered that the bill would ensure complainants know the outcome of inspections. Committee members asked practical questions about fiscal impacts and administrative burden for small municipalities. One senator asked whether the cost of providing the notice — including labor and postage — had been accounted for; the chair replied that the bill contains no state funding and that local costs would vary.
Senator May said providing the complainant a copy “completes the circle” and would make the enforcement system more transparent and likely more effective. The transcript records other senators asking whether an opt‑out should exist for people who merely flag a potential issue without wanting follow‑up; the chair said the bill does not contain an opt‑out but noted the Secretary of State would be required by the bill to promulgate rules and could set thresholds or procedures.
Committee members noted that the bill applies only when an order is actually issued: if an inspection finds no violation and no compliance order is issued, there is no requirement to notify the complainant. Members also asked about repeated nuisance complaints (for example, high grass) and whether the Secretary of State’s rule‑making could address frequency or administrative procedures.
Why it matters: The bill would change local code enforcement practices by formally requiring notification to complainants when enforcement action results. Senators said the change would help complainants monitor whether an order was carried out, but they also questioned whether small municipalities with part‑time code officers could absorb the additional workload without state assistance.
Discussion and outcome: Committee members discussed whether the requirement should include an opt‑out, who should bear costs, and how the Secretary of State should set implementing regulations. The committee voted to report the bill to the floor; AWRs (recorded reservations/abstentions in the transcript) were noted by several members during the vote.
