March 16, 2005 minutes
|
MEMBERS PRESENT: |
|
Co-Chairman Jim Carpenter, Frank Lewis, and Kenny Breithaupt |
|
|
|
|
|
MEMBERS ABSENT: |
|
Chuck Hoag |
|
|
|
|
|
GUESTS PRESENT: |
|
Tim Pinnick, Inspection Supervisor; and Bryan Wyatt |
|
|
|
|
|
Ex-Offico: |
|
Mark Mills, Plumbing Inspector |
|
|
|
|
Carpenter called the meeting to order at 6:35 p.m.
1. Review minutes from February 9, 2005 and February 17, 2005.
Lewis made a motion to approve the minutes of February 9 and 17, 2005.
Breithaupt second the motion, the motion passed 3-0.
3. Update
on sewer stub issue.
Staff informed the Board that Victor Torres, Neighborhood Resources Director, was setting up a meeting with Public Works and Utilities to review the information received from the request for information sent out to the “Big 12” cities. Staff then stated the results of that meeting would be expressed to the Board to the Board at the next meeting.
Breithaupt stated that it looked like the Board had been working on this issue for about four years and it was time to get moving on it.
2. Discuss code adoption process.
Pinnick stated that he wanted the
opportunity to visit with the Board and see what the Code Enforcement Division
could do to assist in the adoption process. Pinnick went on to say that he had
been in contact with Bob Sheppard of IAPMO (International Association of
Plumbing and Mechanical Officials) to see if he could come in and give a code
changes seminar for the Board. Pinnick asked if that would appeal to Board and
stated that anything the City could do to expedite the process.
Breithaupt asked if this was a review for the amendments or to familiarize the Board with the 2003 code.
Staff responded that in adopting a new code the Board has reviewed the changes and made recommendations for amendments.
Pinnick stated by bringing in Bob Sheppard that the Board could possible cut the projected review time by several months. Pinnick asked if the Board thought bringing in Bob Sheppard would be helpful.
Carpenter replied that it would be helpful and Bob Sheppard could let the Board know what areas they needed to focus on.
Pinnick asked the Board because of the length of the Bob Sheppard meeting, would the Board be open to using a working day for the meeting.
Breithaupt, Lewis and Carpenter, all stated that they had flexibility with their schedule and would be able to make that work.
Pinnick stated that he would work to set something up and make it happen.
New Business
Pinnick stated that he would like to walk on an item of business. Pinnick informed the Board that at the March 8th City Commission meeting the licensing ordinance was approved with the exception of the “Class D” licensing. Pinnick stated that the public comment on the ordinance was opened and that Breithaupt, along with Wyatt expressed concern with the lack of input from the trade boards on the issue.
Pinnick stated that the Commission directed staff to seek the Board’s input. Pinnick gave the Board a memo with staff’s comments and questions on the “Class D” licensing and asked if the Board would take a look at it. Pinnick added that he would like to have an open conversation with the Board and hear their comments or concerns.
Breithaupt asked what the problem was with what we have now.
Pinnick responded that from an administrative stand point the three current licensing ordinances, when brought together, are inconsistent.
Pinnick then referred to staff’s memo and asked if the City should have the ability to suspend and revoke licenses. Pinnick stated that the courts currently deal with people working without a permit, the Board hears appeals concerning differences of opinions on codes, but when it gets to the performance of a contractor, the City has no recourse.
Breithaupt questioned that the City currently could not revoke a license.
Pinnick responded that was correct.
Breithaupt asked that if a contractor goes out and consistently does something incorrect, what would be the present process.
Pinnick responded that if it is a code violation that a notice of violation would be issued, if it creates a hazard and someone is injured, dies, or there is property damage then there is the court system typically initiated by the consumer.
Breithaupt asked what happens if a contractor is consistently not obtaining permits when required.
Pinnick responded that the City would file a complaint against that person, which is a misdemeanor and can eventually add up to a $500 fine.
Breithaupt asked, referring to the question on the memo “should the City have the ability to suspend or revoke licenses”, we can make that a law.
Pinnick responded that you can do that, but that is one of the things provided for in the contractors licensing ordinance.
Pinnick went on to say that the big issue is bringing a contractor in front of his peers to revoke a license, plumbing contractor voting on another plumbing contractor.
Staff asked what the Boards thoughts were on the first question, should the City have the ability to suspend or revoke trade licenses.
Breithaupt stated that he thought that someone needed to have that ability, someone other than the court system. Breithaupt stated that he did disagree with Pinnick in that plumbing contractors should be involved in the revocation or suspension process.
Staff informed Breithaupt that a provision for an all trades board was in the licensing ordinance which included a member from the plumbing board.
Lewis and Carpenter agreed that there should be an ability to suspend or revoke licenses.
Carpenter stated that the biggest problem the trades people have with the license ordinance is with the continuing education. Carpenter then stated that he did not have any problems with the rest of the ordinance.
Breithaupt stated that plumbers have attended courses over in Johnson County that did not have anything to do with plumbing because they had that choice and asked if that was correct.
Staff responded that was correct.
Breithaupt stated that if you go to Johnson County for continuing education you get training on the International Code and that is a waste of time, the Board voted to go with the Uniform Code. Breithaupt went on to say that if you are a contractor or journeyman and something new comes along you are going to figure it out, whether it is on your own or your own continuing education. Breithaupt stated that it is just like when the new water heaters came out, the supplier’s had an evening where a manufacturer’s representative came in and showed you how to fix the water heater if something were to go wrong with it.
Pinnick asked if the Board had an issue with question number two, “should the City standardize certification and licensing requirements, such as liability insurance”.
Carpenter responded that was not an issue, a contractor has to carry liability insurance anyway.
Pinnick asked the Board if it was reasonable to pay a $65 renewal fee as a contractor, up from the current renewal fee of $50.
Carpenter responded that it was reasonable.
Wyatt asked to comment and Carpenter granted the request. Wyatt stated the only thing that he would ask is where does the additional money go to or for and why is it being raised.
Pinnick responded that it was a standardization of fees, if necessary the City could investigate the cost of licensing people and build a case, but what the City was interested to know was if the amount was unreasonable.
Pinnick asked the Board if they had heard of or seen Kansas House Bill 2058. Pinnick gave copies to the Board, explained that the Bill, if passed, would require all persons receiving plumbing and mechanical licenses to obtain six hours of continuing education annually and the continuing education would have to be approved by the local governing body or a nationally recognized trade association.
Breithaupt stated he still didn’t like the Johnson County continuing education in the ordinance.
Pinnick stated that question six implied that if a contractor provided proof of continuing education they would be eligible for the renewal rate. Pinnick asked if the contactors licensing ordinance allowed for continuing education by a nationally recognized trade association as well as Johnson County would that solve the problem.
Breithaupt replied that it would definitely ease things but he did not feel that plumbers needed training and if they did, why not all plumbers.
Pinnick responded that the point was well taken, however one of the most common violations on framing inspections has to do with notching and boring of framing members and if the City could get all the trades into a framing class to understand what is acceptable and what is not, it would solve a lot of problems. Pinnick went on to say that during code change years it would be valuable to take training with in your trade and then in other years take other courses.
Wyatt stated that he felt that issue stemmed from a lack of communication from the City during the development stages of the ordinance and wished that the City would have communicated notching and boring issue to the boards. Wyatt went on to say that the plumbing and mechanical board members should have a better dialogue with City staff. Wyatt stated that the adoption process for this ordinance did not include the trades boards enough, that it was little more than a hey what do think about this and that was not adequate.
Staff responded that there had been two public meetings held to hear comments or concerns regarding the ordinance draft.
Pinnick stated that the reality of it was that he was there to sit down with the board and find out what they like, what they did not like and get together on the issue. Pinnick stated that whatever happened, that’s in the past and where do we go from here.
Wyatt stated that he took a little bit of an acceptation to the mechanical contractor provisions, if there is a problem or draft ordinance comes along, why didn’t they come to the mechanical board and let us know that this ordinance does apply to us and how it impacts the trades, then go ahead and have your public meeting.
Pinnick replied that its all water under the bridge, the trades licensing part of the ordinance was removed by the Commission and asked that we review it, that’s what we are doing now.
Breithaupt stated that he would like to see the class D licensing completely taken out, but before that is done he wanted to see what the mechanical board was going to do, because he did not want the plumbing board to get ride of “D” and the mechanical board decide to keep it. Breithaupt then suggested that maybe the Board should meet with the mechanical board.
Pinnick stated that may be a good idea. Pinnick then asked if the continuing education was dropped from the class D licensing would that make it acceptable.
Breithaupt replied that it would then be acceptable.
Lewis stated that he understood Breithaupt’s point, but even with the continuing education he did not have any major problems with the ordinance.
Breithaupt stated that the Board should wait to see what the mechanical board was going to do so that the two boards could be uniform in the decision.
Pinnick stated that answered all his questions.
Wyatt wanted to point out that he was not there representing the mechanical board but there to develop communication with the Board and staff. Wyatt then stated that hopefully the mechanical board, plumbing board and staff can all work together to address any and all concerns with the licensing ordinance.
Pinnick stated that he would contact Bob Sheppard to set up a meeting and thanked the Board for their time.
Wyatt thanked the Board for listening and for their time.
Carpenter asked the Board if there was any other business.
Breithaupt stated that he had a couple of things to discuss. Breithaupt went on to say that the minutes for the Board meetings needed to contain comments from all Board members on every subject.
Carpenter followed that if the Board needed more detailed minutes that there should be someone at the Board meeting for that express purpose such as a stenographer.
Lewis concurred with Carpenter.
Staff replied that the minutes would be more detailed in the future and that if any Board member wanted to change or require more details in the minutes let their concerns be known during the Boards vote on the minutes.
Breithaupt stated that his other concern was the notification to the Board of issues brought before the Commission that may concern the Board. Breithaupt expressed that the Board needed better notification when plumbing related items were being addressed at a Commission meeting.
With no other business a motion was made by Lewis to adjourn the meeting, Breithaupt second the motion, the motion passed 3-0.
Carpenter adjourned the meeting at 7:35 p.m.