september 2008 - wordpress.com · and small businesses.” and if you talk to anyone who knows a...

meet terry mutchler: The Woman Behind Pa.’s Open Records Office

September 2008 n www.psats.org

PSATS, Code Officials Try to Sand out the Rough SpotS

www.psats.org

TownshipNewsPennsylvania

SEPTEMBER 2008Vol. 61, No. 9/ ISSN 0162-5160

PUBLISHING DIRECTORR. Keith Hite

ACTING EDITORJill M. Ercolino

ASSISTANT EDITORJennifer l. Hawbaker

ASSOCIATE EDITORBrenda Wilt

CONTRIBUTING DESIGNERPrint Solutions and

Design Agency, llC

CONTRIBUTING PHOTOGRAPHERCarl Socolow

Published monthly by:Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors4855 Woodland DriveEnola, PA 17025-1291Telephone: (717) 763-0930Fax: (717) 763-9732Internet: www.psats.org

Periodical postage paid at Enola, PA, and other mailing offices. The annual subscription rate is $34. Individual copies of the magazine cost $5 each, which includes postage.

Statements of facts and opinions expressed in this magazine by authors other than Association staff and officers are the responsibility of the authors only and do not necessarily represent those of the officers, members, and staff of the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors.

PSATS does not test or screen the products and services advertised in this magazine. No endorsement by PSATS of advertised products or services is expressed or implied, except those products and services directly supplied by PSATS or its affiliated organizations.

Copyright © 2008 by the Pennsylvania State Association of Township Supervisors. PSATS member townships may reproduce any non-commercial part of this publication upon receipt of verbal permission from the editor. All others must receive written permission from the editor prior to reproduction of any part of this publication.

Postmaster, send all address changes to: Pennsylvania Township News 4855 Woodland DriveEnola, PA 17025-1291

this month

SEPTEMBER 2008 PA TownshipNews 3

The year: 2006.The event: Pennsylvania’s Uniform Con-

struction Code had just turned two. It was a topsy-turvy time: lawmakers

were proposing — and making — a number of changes to the code, and in the midst of all that, townships, building code officials, and inspectors were trying to get a handle on their responsibilities.

After all, Pennsylvania had just gone from having no uniform building code to having one of the most complex codes in the nation, and the road to uniformity has been rocky, to say the least. As one local official told the

Township News then: “This is the time where it gets worse before it gets better.” Given the code’s contentious history, we asked ourselves one simple question when putting together this month’s cover story on the UCC: Where are we now? Well, the truth is, the code is still a bit problematic. However, as that local official predicted, the situation is improving. lawmakers, for instance, have eased up on tin-kering with the UCC. Townships, too, have made considerable strides in establish-ing solid administration and enforcement programs from the ground up. on top of that, a new UCC collaborative, including PSATS and organizations representing the state’s building code officials, contractors, engineers, and architects, has come together to identify ways to improve the code. It’s a small start with great promise, and you can read all about the collaborative’s efforts starting on Page 8. And while you’re flipping through our pages, don’t miss the interview Assistant Editor Jennifer Hawbaker did with Terry Mutchler, the recently appointed executive director of the new office of open Records, which was created when lawmakers en-acted Act 3, Pennsylvania’s revised open Records law, in February. Mutchler and her staff will be working with PSATS and its members as everyone tries to sort out the new law and what it all means. Rest assured, though, the new executive director says she intends to rule with common sense, not an iron fist. “My mantra,” Mutchler told the News, “is that there is a middle-of-the-road ap-proach to open government. As I build this staff and create this office, that will be one of my guiding parameters.” That just goes to show you, whether it’s the building code or the open Records Act, a little cooperation, a little open mindedness, can go a very long way.

Making StridesNew UCC Collaborative, New Open Records Chief Working to Make a Difference

2007 Capital aWaRD — gOlDfOUR-COlOR MagaziNes

haRRiSBuRg

www.psats.org

8 PA TownshipNews september 2008

Group Devises plan to Cut through beleaguered Building Code’s problems BY JILL ERCOLINO / acting EDitOR

UCCBUildinga better

Four years ago, Pennsylvania took a monumental steP: it implemented a statewide building code. that meant, from then on, all new construction had to adhere to the same set of standards. Suffice it to say, the transition has been rocky. Problems have emerged, and lawmakers have toyed with the idea of repealing the Ucc. But a group of industry insiders doesn’t believe that’s the answer. With a few meaningful reforms, they say, Pennsylvania can take its battered building code, sand out the rough spots, and make it better.

september 2008 PA TownshipNews 9

SOcOlOW PhOtOgRaPhY

10 PA TownshipNews SEPTEMBER 2008

Some would say that Pennsylvania’s Uniform Construction Code is a bit like a prizefighter — and not a very lucky one, at that.

Ever since Act 45 was implemented in 2004, it has been kicked, pushed, and poked around, hammered in the press, and criticized for its weaknesses. And through it all, a handful of lawmakers have been standing ringside just waiting for the chance to throw in the towel. As recently as 2007, Sens. Robert Regola and John Gordner, chairs of the Senate local Government and labor and Industry Committees, respectively, were convening hearings to discuss the code’s future. Their question to the public: Should the UCC, which for the first time established uniform guidelines for new homes, businesses, and most home re-modeling projects, stay or should it go? Regola wants the UCC to be re-pealed. “It is time to say enough is enough,” he says. “The shortcomings of the UCC are clearly evident. We are either going to have to keep spending time enacting legislative Band-Aids, or we can take the proper steps of repealing the UCC and starting over to develop a set of standards that are more applicable to Pennsylvania.” Even if a repeal doesn’t happen, Regola says something has to be done. “At a minimum, I believe we need to make sure that there is some sort of exemption for weekend home-improve-ment projects, a fee structure that does not exceed the total cost of the project, prompt action on permits, and a right vested in property owners to hire their own inspectors,” he says. “Ultimately, we need a system that works for every-one: homeowners, architects, builders, inspectors, and local and state officials.” Gordner, too, agrees the UCC isn’t working as intended. “There have been some problems with implementation

of the UCC,” he says. “one would be uniformity of enforcement of the code. We’ve also heard concerns about fee schedules and the costs to homeowners and small businesses.” And if you talk to anyone who knows a thing or two about the code — township officials, consultants, third-party agencies, and state agency officials — they readily confirm that the UCC does have its problems, including the ones Gordner cited.

“We are having growing pains,” says Don Forry, director of code compliance for Manheim Township in lancaster County. “The UCC isn’t perfect.” “It may take us many more years before we smooth out the waters,” adds Dave Buskirk, president of International Code Consultants in Pittsburgh. Still, is that any reason to wipe the slate clean and start over? Bob Buddenbohn, executive officer of the Pennsylvania Association of

Building a Better ucc

Does Pennsylvania's Uniform Construction Code have its problems? yes, it does. However, many believe that repealing the four-year-old law isn’t the answer. Recently, in fact, a group that includes PSATS has been looking at ways to take the existing code and make it better. For instance, at the group’s urging, House Bill 1096 has been introduced to create a technical advisory committee, which would review all UCC-related legislation.

sOCOlOW pHOtOgRapHy


Building Code officials and an expert on the UCC, doesn’t think so. “After the UCC was enacted, I talked to folks in other states that had implemented a uniform code, and they predicted it would be 10, 15, 20 years before we get things entrenched enough and people are on the same page,” he says. “Do we still have a long way to go? Absolutely, but we are making good progress.” Peter Schilling, president of Com-monwealth Code Inspection Service, a third-party agency, agrees: “The build-ing code is going along better than expected. “Anytime you introduce something like this, there is always going to be that period when people are learning and adjusting to it,” he adds. “It takes time.” And while that is taking place, Buddenbohn, PSATS, and others have formed a collaborative that is studying

the building code, dissecting what is working and what isn’t, and developing legislation and other initiatives to sand out the rough spots. “We want to work within the system that the state Department of labor and Industry has established,” he says. of course, some still murmur about repealing the UCC, but these days, it appears lawmakers and others are much more focused on taking what Pennsyl-vania has, instituting a few meaningful, well-thought-out reforms, and building a better code. The first task, though, is exploring what specifically is wrong with the UCC.

Uniform — or not? Certainly, Pennsylvania is not alone in enforcing a uniform building code. Neighboring states, such as Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and ohio, have

all enacted one. But Pennsylvania, true to tradition, has opted to do things a bit differently. other states, for instance, have en-forced their building code at the county or state level. Not Pennsylvania. It has taken a more localized approach. That means that every municipality that opts in to enforce the code — and more than 2,200 out of 2,563 have since 2004 — must develop its own UCC en-forcement program or hire a third-party agency to administer one. In addition, opt-in municipalities may impose stricter guidelines than those in the law with approval from the state Department of labor and In-dustry, which developed the rules that govern the UCC’s administration and enforcement. (Editor’s note: This author-ity to impose stricter local standards has been challenged in Schuylkill Township v. Pennsylvania Builders Association. For more details about this case, turn to Page 49.) “Pennsylvania is Pennsylvania, and we have a unique system of govern-ment,” Buddenbohn says. “That is a

“We are having growing pains. the UCC isn’t perfect.”

“Do we still have a long way to go? absolutely, but we are making good progress.”


major challenge other states haven’t had to face.” So far, though, the localized ap-proach has worked well. To a degree. on one hand, Act 45 has empow-ered township supervisors, if they choose, to manage the code’s enforce-ment in their municipality, play a role in establishing fees, and protect their neighbors from unscrupulous contrac-tors. And when you consider that a ma-jority of opt-in municipalities had never dealt with a building code until just a few years ago, local officials deserve a pat on the back. “Pennsylvania went from 800 mu-nicipalities that had an adopted building code prior to Act 45 to 2,200 after the UCC was implemented. That’s a quan-tum leap,” says lee Milligan, assistant manager for Upper Providence Town-ship in Montgomery County. “We went from zero to 60 in very little time,” adds Tom Sauers, director of

the Central Keystone Council of Gov-ernments, which enforces the code for 40 municipalities in Northumberland, Snyder, and Union counties. And in that short time, township supervisors, building code officials, and inspectors have not only had to learn the intricacies of the UCC and get a grasp on their responsibilities, but they have also had to educate unaware constituents and contractors about the new requirements. In addition, lawmak-ers have done a lot of tinkering with the code since its implementation, a situation that has kept local officials hopping as they try to stay on top of the changes. The trouble is, with so many hands in the pot, the code has become any-thing but uniform, industry insiders say,

pointing to the fact that those involved — municipalities, inspection agen-cies, and builders — all have their own unique philosophy about the UCC. Building code inspectors, too, vary in their interpretations. “To call the UCC ‘uniform’ is a mis-nomer due to the existence of enforce-ment and administrative differences among municipalities,” David leinbach of Associated Builders and Contractors testified at last year’s UCC hearings. “The purpose of the code was to make everything uniform, which leads to consistency,” Manheim Township’s Don Forry says. “That, however, hasn’t always been the case. Human nature makes us all different.” But a lack of uniformity isn’t the UCC’s only problem.

Problems, small and large Because the code does not include caps on inspection and permit fees, crit-ics contend that some municipalities are profiting from code enforcement pro-grams that, under the law, should only be helping them cover their costs. While residential fees do vary greatly from township to township, with some homeowners paying as little as $500 and


To learn more about the ucc,

check out this month’s Q&a’s

on Page 94.

sOCOlOW pHOtOgRapHy

Some critics of the UCC say that with so many hands in the pot, Pennsylvania’s building code has become anything but uniform. They point to the fact that those involved — municipalities, inspection agencies, and builders — all have their own unique philosophy about the UCC. Building code inspectors, too, vary in their interpretations.


T wo Uniform Construction Code cases that could have a significant impact on townships are before the pennsylvania su-preme Court, which will

have the final say on whether munici-palities may designate a single entity to perform building code inspections. “the cases have been argued, and now we’re just waiting to hear from the court,” says psats legal Counsel tom Wenger. “since this occurred some months ago, a decision could come any day now; but, of course, that’s entirely up to the court. it’s not on any deadline.” Allegheny Inspection Service, Inc. v. North Union Township and allied Building Inspections v. Township of Millcreek, et al. were appealed after the Commonwealth Court invalidated the townships’ attempts to simplify and manage inspections by appoint-ing a single agency to do the work.

Weak provisions in the UCC the cases highlighted two weak provisions in the UCC that seem at odds with each other and proved to be troublesome for the townships involved. section 501(b)(2) states that townships may retain “one or more construction code officials or third-party agencies to act on behalf of the municipality for administration and enforcement of this act.” On its face, section 501 appears to allow munici-palities to deal exclusively with one party for inspections. However, section 501(d) provides that “nothing in this act shall allow a municipality to prohibit a construction code official who meets the require-ments of Chapter 7 and remains in good standing from performing in-spections in the municipality.” in Allegheny, North Union town-ship officials entered into an ex-

clusive contract with a company to administer and enforce the code and perform building inspections. the township believed it was acting in accordance with section 501(b)(2). the plaintiff, a competing inspection agency, filed a declaratory judgment, claiming that by refusing to recognize inspections by other entities, the township had violated section 501(d). after the township received a fa-vorable ruling from the trial court, the case was appealed to the Common-wealth Court, which analyzed and compared the two provisions.

Enforcement is one thing, inspections are another the court noted that section 501(b)(2) authorizes a municipality to retain one or more construction code officials for the “administration and enforcement” of the UCC, whereas section 501(d) provides that a municipality may not prohibit a qualified construction code official from performing “inspections.” the court concluded that the only way to properly sort out the two seemingly contradictory provisions is to recognize the difference between “administration and enforce-ment” and “inspections.” Because the terms are not defined in the UCC, the court considered the definitions of “administration,” “enforcement,” and “inspection” in Black’s Law Dictionary and found that “each word implicates a different action.” The court found that the definitions conflicted with the trial court’s reason-ing that because section 501(b)(2) authorized the township to designate an agent to administer and enforce the UCC, the provision also authorized the township to designate an exclusive agent to perform inspections. the Commonwealth Court dis-agreed: “By failing to recognize that construction inspections for the purposes of the UCC are a func-

tion separate and distinct from the administration and enforcement of UCC regulations, the trial court mis-interprets section 501(d) of the UCC and renders the express prohibition in that section a nullity.” Based on this analysis, the court held that while townships are authorized to enter exclusive contracts with agencies to administer and enforce the code, they are not authorized to designate a single entity to perform UCC inspec-tions. additionally, the court determined that allowing a municipality to contract exclusively with one inspection agency would compromise the “integrity of building inspections” and increase inspection costs for consumers. as the court was deliberating the Allegheny case, it also considered the similar case of Allied Building Inspec-tions v. Township of Millcreek, et al., in which the township, as part of an inter-municipal agreement, contracted with a single inspection company to enforce the Uniform Construction Code. the court found that the township had erred in appointing one inspec-tion service. However, because this opinion was unreported, Allegheny will be the case to set precedent.

Diminishing control over inspections at the very least, these rulings diminish the control that townships have over the quality of construc-tion projects in their communities. at worst, they create a situation that is highly susceptible to abuse by build-ers and inspectors. Until the supreme Court issues its decision, though, the association recommends that township officials consult their solicitor on how these rulings may affect their municipality. for more information about these cases, townships should call psats at (717) 763-0930.

Pa. Supreme court considers whether municipalities may designate an exclusive agency to perform ucc inspections



others paying as much as $20,000 for permits and inspections, the biggest bone of contention is with the fees as-sessed on commercial and industrial construction projects, UCC expert Bob Buddenbohn says. “Several different formulas exist for arriving at fee schedules,” he says, “and we’re finding that, in some cases, the formulas used don’t match the project.” Recently, in fact, Mahoning Town-ship in Montour County found itself facing a legal claim after the Geisinger Health System demanded a refund of more than $1 million in zoning and building permit fees, which the provider claimed were “excessive and unlawful.” Robert o’Brien, executive deputy secretary for the Department of labor and Industry, says that unjustifiable fees are a rare and small problem, and that

caps would help to resolve this issue. (Editor’s note: PSATS has testified several times against placing caps on permit and inspection fees.) However, a more pressing concern for l&I and others is that some opt-in townships have failed to establish a UCC appeals board, a requirement under Act 45. These boards give home-owners and contractors an outlet if they feel an inspector has made an improper decision. (For more information about establishing fees and UCC appeals boards, turn to this month’s Q&A column on 4.) “This is an important procedural step,” o’Brien says. Mitch Hoffman, a local govern-ment policy manager for the Governor’s Center for local Government Services, agrees: “A surprising number of munici-palities haven’t done this yet. That’s not an option. When you opt in, you are required to establish an appeals board.” Buddenbohn says this is happening for a number of reasons. Some town-ships are simply unaware of the mandate, which allows municipalities to establish



their own appeals board or a joint board with neighboring communities. “Then there are those, of course, that are taking the position, ‘If we ever get an appeal, we’ll pull a board together,’” he says. This kind of thinking doesn’t do anyone any good, says Tim Palaski, gen-eral manager of the Middle Department Inspection Agency, a third-party firm headquartered in West Chester. He says that because it takes time to find the right people with the right cre-dentials to serve on an appeals board, contractors and their clients are left with a few undesirable options. They can accept an inspector’s decision they don’t agree with to keep their project on schedule, stop and wait until the ap-peals board is up and running, or file an appeal with the court of common pleas. “All of this just holds up projects and costs everyone money,” Palaski says. The truth is, though, that Pennsyl-vania’s UCC does not include fines or penalties for municipalities that don’t comply with the regulations. That may change. o’Brien says that l&I wants lawmak-ers to expand its authority by allowing the department to issue fines and revoke the opt-in status of municipalities that don’t comply with the UCC’s requirements. The department also wants to broad-en the scope of its audit program, he says. Since 2005, l&I has been auditing municipalities that are certified to inspect commercial buildings for handicap ac-cess. This change, if approved, would give l&I the ability to audit the enforcement programs of all opt-in municipalities. “We see these audits as an educa-tional tool,” o’Brien says, “and we be-lieve they will help municipalities better understand the UCC.”


A looming labor shortage Meanwhile, as the state ponders its options to ensure compliance with the UCC, the building code soldiers on in Pennsylvania’s townships. There, legions of inspectors are up bright and early every morning reviewing blueprints, filling out forms, responding to e-mails, returning phone calls, and going into the field, where it’s their job to enforce the regulations. “The phone doesn’t stop ringing, and plans keep coming in,” says Mi-chael Poluka, a building code inspector for lower Paxton Township in Dauphin County. “It’s a challenge staying on top of things. You get tugged in all direc-tions all of the time.” “Building code inspectors are veri-fiers,” Tom Sauers of the Central Key-stone Council of Governments says. “They make sure what’s on the docu-ment is being done in the field. It’s that simple. Some, however, are overzealous. They have their own ideas about what their role is.

“our job — our only job — is to make sure we have safe, decent, compli-ant construction,” he says. Still, when it comes to inspectors, townships may think they are getting one thing when, in fact, they are get-ting something completely different. “A township may assume an indi-vidual has gotten his certification and is registered with l&I,” Mitch Hoffman of the Governor’s Center for local Government Services says. “However, we’re finding that many of these people have never been certified or are doing inspections in areas where they aren’t certified.” [To confirm an inspector’s credentials, townships should call L&I’s Bureau of Occupational and Industrial Safety at (717) 787-3806.] However, by April 2009, when the final grandfathering period in the UCC ends, all working building code inspec-tors must have the proper credentials from the state. That doesn’t help townships and third-party agencies right now, though.

Dan Slatt, a building code inspector for Lower Paxton Township in Dauphin County, makes sure things are up to snuff in a home that is being renovated. Slatt is just one of the hundreds of inspectors who are ensuring that all new homes and busi-nesses meet the Uniform Construction Code’s requirements. Some fear, however, that when the final grandfathering period in the UCC ends next April, the state’s shortage of qualified inspectors will only intensify.

“We have a limited pool of candidates to hire from, and it’s been a total nightmare finding inspectors,”

sOCOlOW pHOtOgRapHy

ä


“We have a limited pool of candi-dates to hire from, and it’s been a total nightmare finding inspectors,” Tim Palaski of the Middle Department Inspection Agency says. “If they have their certifications, they’re not sitting around waiting for the phone to ring. They are working somewhere.” Palaski and others worry that by the time next spring rolls around, the cur-rent labor shortage will only worsen as grandfathered inspectors, unable to get the required certifications, are taken out of circulation. “I did an informal survey of Al-legheny County recently and found that many inspectors aren’t certified,” says Peg Russell, president of Code.sys Code Consulting, another third-party agency based in Pittsburgh. “We’ve only been hiring certified inspectors so I’m not worried about the labor shortage, as long as I can meet my commitments.” “No doubt about it, the certification requirements are taking their toll,” Sauers says, “and this will really come home to roost in April 2009 when the grandfa-thering is over completely.” True enough. But it’s also true that even if an inspector manages to pass the certifica-tion exam, he may not be cut out for the job, a situation exacerbated by the fact that the UCC does not require inspectors to have construction-related experience. “For someone to be an inspector, a plans examiner, or a building code official, they must pass a standardized, multiple-choice test,” Bob Buddenbohn of the Pennsylvania Association of Building Code officials says. “It’s not easy, but this opens the door for good test takers to get state credentials with-out any experience.”

Cures for what ails the UCC oK, so by now it’s clear, the UCC has its problems. But what’s being done to fix them? Well, ever since the legislation was implemented in 2004, lawmakers — to



the frustration of everyone responsible for enforcing the code — have been tweaking it. So much so that nine amendments have been enacted since townships began enforcing the UCC four years ago. And it all started when the General Assembly passed Act 92 of 2004, which made sweeping changes to the code’s residential construction guidelines, just three months after the UCC was imple-mented. Some say this was the snowball that started the avalanche of legislation to perfect and clarify the UCC. Although the General Assembly has since backed off the code, it frus-trated township and code enforcement officials that lawmakers were passing legislation that was affecting a whole industry. Meanwhile, they had no idea about the ramifications their changes were having in the field. “These are highly technical issues, and lawmakers were changing things based on political motivations,” Bud-denbohn says. “Unfortunately, we have had to live with the consequences.” To fix this problem and others, an informal UCC collaborative, including PSATS and organizations representing the state’s building code officials, build-ers, engineers, and architects, has been formed and is working to overcome some of the code’s shortcomings. For now, the group is focusing on two things: providing lawmakers with technical assistance on code-related legislation and overcoming the shortage of qualified and experienced inspectors. A bill introduced by Rep. Ron Buxton, a former code enforcement of-ficer himself, may help. House Bill 1096 would create a 19-member technical advisory council, whose members would be appointed by the governor after meeting certain standards. The council would advise lawmak-ers on all UCC-related legislation and, every three years, review changes to the International Code Council’s In-ternational Building Code, the model for Pennsylvania’s UCC, to ensure new requirements are applicable here in the commonwealth. “Almost every state that has a UCC has a mechanism in place that doesn’t blindly adopt what comes from the ICC,” Buddenbohn says. “The council

the Uniform Construction Code is a complex law, and townships are bound to have questions about it. Here are the places that PSATS sug-gests you turn to for guidance:

The Governor’s Center for Local Government ServicesToll-free phone: (888) 223-6837Web site: www.newpa.com (Click on “Department of Community and Eco-nomic Development,” then “Local Government Services.”)The center offers:

• technical information about the building code’s administration andenforcement; and

• help in locating funding sources to establish a building code program.

Pennsylvania Department of Labor and IndustryPhone: (717) 787-3806 for the Bureau of Occupational and industrial safetyWeb site: www.dli.state.pa.us/codes The department provides: • answers about registering and certifying code officials; • updates on amendments to the building code; and • updated lists of registered and certified code officials and certified

third-party agencies. [These lists are updated as necessary and are posted at www.dli.state.pa.us/codes. Townships can also have a list mailed to them by calling (717) 787-3806.]

PSATS and the Pennsylvania Construction Codes AcademyPhone: (717) 763-0930Web site: www.paconstructioncodesacademy.orgThe Association and the academy offer: • certification courses for current and potential code officials; • continuing education workshops for code officials, contractors, and

design professionals; • general building code workshops for municipal officials, secretaries,

and managers; • information about the building code’s administration and enforcement; • a large inventory of code books and related items; and • networking opportunities for code enforcement officials.

International Code CouncilToll-free phone: (888) 422-7233 Web site: www.iccsafe.orgThe council is your source for: • code books, plan review and inspection checklists, and much more; • technical interpretations of the ICC code series; • online exam preparation and courses; • national certification examinations; and • information about the council’s state chapters.

where to turn for building code help

www.newpa.com

www.dli.state.pa.us/codes


www.paconstructioncodesacademy.org

www.iccsafe.org


would solve some real problems.” The collaborative has been urging lawmakers, whose summer recess ends this month, to take quick action on House Bill 1096, especially since the ICC will be issuing a new code series in early 2009. “The technical advisory council is a broad-based effort that has huge support,” Buddenbohn says. “Now, we’re just trying to get House Bill 1096 across the finish line.” The collaborative is also hoping that lawmakers will consider introducing legislation to create a voluntary trainee program for building inspectors. The program would allow prospective in-spectors to work in the field, under the guidance of an experienced code en-forcement official, for two years before taking the certification exam. Buddenbohn thinks this would be a win-win for everyone. A trainee program would not only help ease the impact of the labor shortage, but it would also open the door for inexperienced inspectors to get hands-on mentoring in the field. “It’s exciting,” he says. “We’re jazzed about it.”

Information, training available While the UCC collaborative is working with lawmakers, others are step-ping in to fill additional gaps that have surfaced with the code’s enactment. In 2005, PSATS released the results of a UCC survey, in which township officials said they wanted a clearinghouse for reli-able and consistent code interpretations. While the state has yet to formally establish such a place, plenty of other resources exist where townships and their code enforcement officials can go for help with the building code. one place to turn is the state De-partment of labor and Industry. (See the sidebar on Page 19 for the department’s contact information.) As noted earlier, l&I played a lead role in crafting the rules that govern the UCC’s administration and en-forcement. And today, when residents or contractors have a problem with a


the pennsylvania Construction Codes academy is just a few years old, but in that time, it has trained more than 11,500 construction code of-ficials. the governor’s Center for local government services created the academy, which is administered by psats in cooperation with the state’s other local government associations, to meet the demand for technical information about pennsylvania’s Uniform Construction Code, prepare construction code officials for state certification exams, and provide con-tinuing education courses. and while pCCa is an educational resource for building inspectors, con-tractors, architects, and engineers, it has also become a clearinghouse for township officials looking for updated, reliable information about the UCC. Much of this information can be found on pCCa’s Web site, www.paconstructioncodesacademy.org. “the center has put a lot of effort into pCCa’s Web site because it wants the site to be a source for consistent and accurate information about the building code,” says anne McCollum, pCCa’s logistical coordina-tor. “Therefore, if townships have a question about the code, this is one of the first places they should turn to for help. “it’s important to note that the Web site will be undergoing a major up-grade soon and that we’ll be implementing an e-mail alert system that will allow us to reach thousands of code officials with important news about the UCC.” McCollum encourages township officials who visit the Web site to register for the UCC Discussion Board, which brings together local govern-ment officials and building professionals from across the state. This is a valuable forum for networking, discussing code issues, and seeking UCC interpretations, she says, adding that this fall, pCCa plans to begin an in-teractive UCC e-mail discussion group. townships should also keep in mind that the academy will bring its workshops to their doorstep. “pCCa’s mission is to provide affordable and accessible training about the UCC,” McCollum says. “We invite townships that want a particular workshop presented in their municipality to give psats a call, and we will help them make the arrangements. “Keep in mind, too, that PCCA’s by-request training is not limited to what is listed on the Web site or in our catalog. We welcome the opportu-nity to tailor a workshop to suit your needs.” for more information about pCCa, its training programs, and services, township officials should call PSATS at (717) 763-0930. For upcoming courses, see page 54.

Pa. construction codes academy emerges as reliable source for building code information



building inspector, the code requires them to file their complaints with the department. l&I also handles hundreds of ques-tions each month about the code and encourages townships to use it as a source for information. The department also regularly posts UCC updates at www.dli.state.pa.us/codes. The easy-to-navigate site features forms, advisories, and lists of registered and certified building code officials and third-party agencies. Township officials can also go there to sign up for UCC e-Alerts, which are periodic e-mails that provide information about code news and changes. Another good source of information is the Governor’s Center for local Gov-ernment Services, which Act 45 desig-nated as the state’s primary resource for technical information about the code. There, Mitch Hoffman, a local gov-ernment policy manager, has become the center’s UCC guru. A one-man show, Hoffman manages his UCC responsibili-ties by working closely with the Penn-sylvania Construction Codes Academy, which is based at PSATS and provides training for code enforcement officials. Thanks to its Web site, www.pa-constructioncodesacademy.org, PCCA has emerged as a source for reliable and accurate information about the code. In fact, Hoffman encourages township officials and their building inspectors to register and participate in the site’s UCC Discussion Board, which covers a wide range of topics such as fees, appeals, and the certification of code officials. “I’m on there a lot,” Hoffman says, “and we’re using this forum to provide consistent answers about the code.” Primarily, though, PCCA is focused on training and, of late, has been offer-ing new sessions on establishing UCC appeals boards and justifiable permit and inspection fees. Information about all workshops is posted on the academy’s Web site and is available by calling PSATS at (717) 763-0930. “We’ve been through our paces with the building code, and we still have a

few more years to go before we work out all the kinks,” Hoffman says. “Educa-tion is a key component.” Meaningful legislation and coopera-tion are important, too, says Tom Sauers


of the Central Keystone Council of Gov-ernments. “Addressing the legislative shortcomings and working with the builders … that is what’s going to make this thing work.” F

“We’ve been through our paces with the building code, and we still have a few more years to go before we work out all the kinks. Education is a key component.”



september 2008 - wordpress.com · and small businesses.” and if you talk to anyone who knows a...

Documents