Public Safety and Security Committee
JOINT FAVORABLE REPORT
Bill No.: SB-846
AN ACT CONCERNING THE CERTIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT
INSPECTORS AND INSPECTION FIRMS TO PERFORM STATE BUILDING
Title: CODE INSPECTIONS.
Vote Date: 3/24/2021
Vote Action: Joint Favorable Substitute
PH Date: 2/11/2021
File No.:
Disclaimer: The following JOINT FAVORABLE Report is prepared for the benefit of the
members of the General Assembly, solely for purposes of information, summarization and
explanation and does not represent the intent of the General Assembly or either chamber
thereof for any purpose.
SPONSORS OF BILL:
Public Safety and Security Committee
REASONS FOR BILL:
Currently professional building inspectors are having a difficult time keeping up with some of
the permit reviews and finalization of occupancy. This has led to some delays for completion
of projects for contractors. The proposed legislation would establish a program to certify
independent inspectors and inspection firms to perform inspections under the State Building
Code. These additional resources may help expedite the finalization of the permit process.
These resources may assist local municipalities, but these are concerns regarding the
implementation of all safety standards.
RESPONSE FROM ADMINISTRATION/AGENCY:
Noel Petra, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Administrative Services The written
testimony submitted is in favor of the legislation. The testimony states that many towns and
municipalities are having trouble performing building inspections in a timely manner. The
resulting delays can cause public hazards because building codes violations are not being
identified and addressed on a timely manner. The testimony authorizes DAS to create a
three-step approach to the privatizing building inspections. The testimony further states that
the proposed legislation would not affect public safety, cause the loss of revenue for
municipalities, dilute the current statutory authority of local building officials or create a plan to
substitute private building inspectors for the public officials.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF SUPPORT:
AGC of Connecticut The testimony submitted supports this legislation. The use of third-
party inspectors will help both municipalities as well as the building industry. Members of the
organization have reported that Connecticut has experienced delayed inspections and
building reviews, both at the state and local levels, due to lack of available qualified
inspectors. The third-party inspector program will be at the discretion of each municipality to
increase the timeliness if inspections but the use of the program is voluntary. SB 846 calls
for a robust and effective pre-qualification and certification system.
American Institute of Architects, Connecticut Chapter The testimony submitted
supports the legislation. The proposed legislation will lift some of the plan review burden, as
well as expedite, other services that many of the municipalities building departments perform.
The organization also supports the oversight written inti SB 846.
Connecticut Conference of Municipalities The testimony submitted supports the
proposed legislation. It notes that the program will be administered and overseen by the
Department of Administrative Services. The testimony indicates this program would be an
option for local municipalities to utilize and could potentially enhance the timing of inspections
which could potentially increase local development. It was also commented on that many
town officials are now taking on more responsibilities and at times are stretched thin and
find it a challenge to keep up with demand. This ultimately may cause delays for the
contractor which would cause new construction delays and completion.
Gina Calabro, Executive Director, Home Builders and Remodelers Association of
Connecticut, Inc. The testimony supports the proposed legislation. They note that it is a
piece of business-friendly legislation. Members have commented that they have experienced
delays in projects due to the lack of timely inspections. This legislation could ultimately save
the contractors and developers time and money, while they continue to work on insuring the
safety and well-being of the residents. Often times the development and construction fields
are very up and down this legislation would allow municipalities to more quickly respond to
market demands.
NATURE AND SOURCES OF OPPOSITION:
Zak Leavy, Legislative and Political Coordinator, AFSCME Council 4 AFSCMEs
testimony is in opposition of this legislation. It is noted that currently all state and municipal
inspectors are accountable to the public for the work and services performed. They go on to
say that building inspectors should remain a public service rather than being part of the
private sector. There will be no issues regarding increased revenues or profit motives. The
testimony also pints out that there are so many open questions and details, with few solidified
answers.
Stephen Anderson, President, CSEA, SEIU Local 2001 The testimony submitted by this
organization opposes SB 846. This union represents the state building inspectors as well as
many of the local building inspectors. SB 846 would take away the core governmental
function of ensuring public safety from the dedicated professional building inspectors. The
effective oversight of the public would be marginalized. The legislation remains silent on what
the necessary standards and qualifications would need to be for a private inspector. It also
Page 2 of 4 SB-846
would require the State Building Inspector to administer and perform audits of this new
program and there are no funds included for this added responsibility.
Carl Chisem, President, CEUI, SEIU Local 511 The testimony is opposed to this bill and
notes that they stand with CSEA. The testimony states that this bill compromises the public
building inspection process and ultimately puts the public safety at risk. Shifting responsibility
for building inspections to the private sector may put the interests of the private sector ahead
of the safety of the residents. The testimony states that rather than privatize these positions ,
the state and municipalities should be recruiting and retaining inspectors that are necessary
to fill vacant positions. By maintaining the inspection process in the public arena, inspections
will be maintained at the highest level while continuing to insure public safety.
Allan duFreund, Assistant Project Manager, State of Connecticut Department of
Administrative Services Construction Service (DAS CS) The testimony provided
opposes the legislation. As written, the legislation lacks clarity it is not concise. Questions
such as how the private building inspectors will be held accountable? Also, how will
disagreements between private building inspectors and town officials be handled? SB 846
will require additional staffing to keep track of private building inspectors. There are no
additional funds earmarked for this additional staffing in the bill.
Benjamin Funk, CEUI, SEIU Local 2001 The testimony submitted opposes SB 846. The
testimony asks if this legislation will cause municipalities to lay off licensed building
inspectors. It also notes that there will be additional expenses for the private building
inspectors even after the homeowner has paid for a building permit, which includes a public
inspection. Would the use of private building inspectors increase a municipalities liability?
The testimony points out so many of the open ended questions contains in SB 846.
Kimberly Glassman, Director, Foundation for Fair Contracting of Connecticut, Inc.
This testimony opposes SB 846. The testimony calls into question the unintended
consequences of workplace injuries and the potential diluting of safety standards. Also, how
big will the standard gap be between the public and private inspectors, and how will that be
addressed and managed. It goes on to say that construction is a dangerous business and by
potentially changing the standards there may be an increase in workplace injuries and
fatalities. The testimony recommends an increase the budget of DAS, so as allow DAS to hire
additional state building inspectors.
Sal Luciano, President AFL CIO This testimony opposes SB 846. The testimony states
that the public building inspectors perform many functions such as permit approval
inspections as well as maintaining a d protecting the safety of the public. Much of the
language is vague about responsibilities and qualifications of private inspectors. SB 846 adds
additional responsibilities for the State Building Inspectors, without adding any additional
funding. In conclusion, the testimony urges the Committee to work with DAS to create
strategies to recruit and retain new building inspectors.
Daniel Wagoner, Associate Project Manager, The Department of Administrative
Services The testimony opposes SB 846. The testimony states that building inspectors
work tirelessly to complete all their inspections on a timely, professional and thorough
manner. The proposed legislation does not speak to the practical realities of the safety needs
Page 3 of 4 SB-846
of a properly conducted inspection. It is also noted that not a single state building inspector
vacant position has been advertised or filled over the past few years.
David Wlodkowski, CSEA, SEIU Local 2001 This testimony opposes SB 846. The
proposed bill does not specify on how this fundamental change in building inspections
(private vs. public) will be executed. A fundamental change in public policy would require the
legislature to spell out how this change will be met the health, safety and welfare of public
necessitates nothing less. SB 846 also makes a discussion about additional reasonabilitys of
some employees, which may cause corresponding expenses, without a plan for how those
expenditures will be met.
Anthony DeNapoli, CSEA, Local 2001 This testimony opposes SB 846. The proposed
legislation compromises the inspection process and puts public safety at risk. There is a
significant lack of detail in how to implement this legislation. By shifting inspectors from the
public sector to the private sector you move away from the fundamental interest of the
inspector from safety to private industry revenues. This bill does not address who will be
upholding the standards of the private inspectors. Also privatizing inspections could cost the
loss of jobs at the state and local level. As written, this proposed legislation has many holes
and unanswered questions in it. A better answer maybe to recruit and retain qualified
inspectors for currently vacant state and local positions.
Reported by: Richard O'Neil Date: 4/2/21
Page 4 of 4 SB-846