Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intergovernmental Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sleepy Hollow board approves shared building‑code services agreement with Carpentersville after extended Q&A
Summary
The Sleepy Hollow village board approved a resolution to enter an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Carpentersville to provide building-code and permitting services, following questions from trustees about fees, staffing, insurance and termination terms.
Get email alerts on the Intergovernmental Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Sleepy Hollow village board voted to approve a resolution authorizing an intergovernmental agreement with the Village of Carpentersville to provide building-code and permitting services, the board confirmed at its Sept. 8 meeting.
The vote followed roughly an hour of questions from trustees and staff about how the shared-services arrangement would work in practice. The president (speaker S6) said the IGA is intended to provide interim coverage while the village evaluates long-term options for its building department.
Why it matters: Trustees pressed for clarity on the scope of services, how fees would be handled, and protections for the village if Carpentersville lacked specific inspectors. Director Detmer (speaker S9) and finance director Eugene (speaker S2) explained that the arrangement could reduce resident permit costs because Carpentersville’s internal staffing allows lower per-permit fees than private consultants, though Sleepy Hollow will add a modest administrative amount to recover local costs.
Key details and questions raised - Fees: Carpentersville proposed substantially lower base fees for some permits; the board cited a roof-permit example that Carpentersville priced at $75. The village amended that figure to $100 to cover administration and to ensure payment to the vendor before permits issue. - Staffing and coverage: Trustees asked whether Carpentersville’s inspectors would attend Planning & Zoning Commission (PCC) meetings; officials said the building official does not normally attend PCC meetings but would be available if necessary. - Insurance and indemnification: Board members asked for proof-of-insurance language and a process for obtaining certificates; staff said Carpentersville’s template included insurance language from its contracts but that municipal-to-municipal IGAs typically rely on standard municipal insurance practice. The board requested copies of certificates and confirmation of coverage terms. - Termination and oversight: The IGA includes a 60‑day termination provision; trustees noted that clause would allow either party to end the agreement on notice if the arrangement proved unsuitable.
What the agreement does and does not do - It sets Carpentersville as the provider of building-code services (permit review and inspections) beginning after Sleepy Hollow’s current contract expires on Oct. 4. The agreement allows use of Carpentersville’s permitting software and scheduling tools and contemplates that some permit review tasks will be performed by Carpentersville’s community-development staff while inspections will be issued by their building inspectors. - It does not lock the village into a permanent contract: trustees emphasized the 60‑day termination right and said the arrangement can be modified or ended if performance or coverage is insufficient.
Board debate and reaction Trustees expressed caution about capacity (Carpentersville handles a much larger permit volume) and sought a list of specific contact points, expected turnaround times and the process to hire outside inspectors for specialties (for example, plumbing) if Carpentersville lacked available personnel. Finance director Eugene said Sleepy Hollow expects to receive a larger share of fees despite lower base rates because the village will charge a small administrative markup.
Direct quote: President (speaker S6) summarized the board’s intent in introducing the item, saying the agreement was pursued so the village would “have an interim coverage while we’re figuring things out with our official,” noting the board wanted continuity during the transition.
Next steps: Board members asked staff to produce written clarifications and to add requested insurance and staffing clarifications to the IGA language or a memo before final administrative steps. The board approved the resolution by roll call vote the same evening.

