Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permitting Reform topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsors say bills will remove duplicate permits for appliance replacements
Summary
Representatives introduced bills to eliminate unnecessary duplicate permits for replacement appliances, arguing the change reduces costs and inspection burden; a contractor estimated the extra permit/inspection burden costs homeowners tens of millions annually under certain assumptions.
Representatives introduced House Bills 5905 and 5906 to prevent what sponsors described as "double permitting" when replacement equipment uses existing electrical, gas or water connections. Representative Pavlo presented the bills as a way to reduce unreasonable burdens on trades, businesses and consumers.
Dave Squires, a contractor and co‑owner of Vincent's Heating and Plumbing, testified that in many cases reconnecting existing wiring should not trigger a separate electrical permit and that municipal practices since about 2020 have led to additional permit and inspection fees. He told the committee that the amendment before them (section 11) would generally prevent additional $150–$200 permit/inspection charges for typical furnace or water heater replacements where connections are reattached to existing circuits. "By eliminating the need for a 2nd permit, we can make the services cheaper and more efficient," Squires said.
Squires presented estimates during testimony: he said about 72% of Michigan homes are single‑family, that the average life of a heating system is roughly 17 years, and he used those numbers to approximate annual replacement demand and an aggregate annual cost to homeowners arising from extra permits (a figure presented in testimony as over $28,000,000 under specific assumptions). He also said municipalities have increasingly required separate electrical permits for reconnections, creating coordination problems for contractors and extra inspection workload.
Committee members asked whether the bills would cover plug‑in appliances and how scope would be defined; Squires said plug‑in appliances are typically treated differently and the bills target replacements of similar size and capacity where no incremental complexity is introduced. He said the proposed change would not remove electrician work where required by code; rather, it would reduce duplicative permitting where the mechanical or plumbing contractor performs reconnection work under existing allowances in the Skills Trade Regulation Act.
The committee recorded testimony and supporting cards from industry groups including the Home Builders Association and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy; no committee vote on these bills was recorded in the transcript of this session.
