Empathy List Archives

JM

Jon Miller

Tue, Mar 16, 2021 3:49 PM

Counselors:

Have any of your cities created a process to require developers hire third party inspectors to conduct infrastructure inspections, like water, sewer, drainage and paving?

Anyone seen any issues with the City requiring that a developer hire a third-party inspector to conduct infrastructure inspections and provide some type of a certification to the City that the infrastructure improvements meet city code and applicable professional construction requirements? Or, alternatively, requiring that the developer pay the direct costs of such an inspection to the contracted city engineers?

Thanks,

Jonathan E. Miller
City Attorney
City of Mustang
1885 Piedmont Road N., Suite B
P.O. Box 546
Piedmont, Oklahoma 73078
Telephone: (405) 883-6266
Facsimile: (405) 883-6155

This message is sent by a lawyer and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may not be distributed to any other person without written consent of the sender. Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

Counselors: Have any of your cities created a process to require developers hire third party inspectors to conduct infrastructure inspections, like water, sewer, drainage and paving? Anyone seen any issues with the City requiring that a developer hire a third-party inspector to conduct infrastructure inspections and provide some type of a certification to the City that the infrastructure improvements meet city code and applicable professional construction requirements? Or, alternatively, requiring that the developer pay the direct costs of such an inspection to the contracted city engineers? Thanks, Jonathan E. Miller City Attorney City of Mustang 1885 Piedmont Road N., Suite B P.O. Box 546 Piedmont, Oklahoma 73078 Telephone: (405) 883-6266 Facsimile: (405) 883-6155 ******************************************************************************* This message is sent by a lawyer and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may not be distributed to any other person without written consent of the sender. Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

DD

david davis

Tue, Mar 16, 2021 3:55 PM

The cities I have worked with charge an inspection fee equal to a percentage of the costs of the public improvements installed by developers. I believe the range to be 2 to 3 percent.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This transmission is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521 and intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is or may be an attorney-client communication and as such privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message.

s/ David A. Davis
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. DAVIS
4312 N. Classen Blvd.
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118
405 840-6353
405 557-0777 (FAX)
ddavislaw@live.com mailto:ddavislaw@live.com

From: Jon Miller jonmiller@jem-pc.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 10:49 AM
To: oama (oama@lists.imla.org) oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] MUNICIPAL CODE INSPECTIONS

Counselors:

Have any of your cities created a process to require developers hire third party inspectors to conduct infrastructure inspections, like water, sewer, drainage and paving?

Anyone seen any issues with the City requiring that a developer hire a third-party inspector to conduct infrastructure inspections and provide some type of a certification to the City that the infrastructure improvements meet city code and applicable professional construction requirements? Or, alternatively, requiring that the developer pay the direct costs of such an inspection to the contracted city engineers?

Thanks,

Jonathan E. Miller

City Attorney

City of Mustang

1885 Piedmont Road N., Suite B

P.O. Box 546

Piedmont, Oklahoma 73078

Telephone: (405) 883-6266

Facsimile: (405) 883-6155

This message is sent by a lawyer and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may not be distributed to any other person without written consent of the sender. Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

The cities I have worked with charge an inspection fee equal to a percentage of the costs of the public improvements installed by developers. I believe the range to be 2 to 3 percent. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This transmission is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521 and intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is or may be an attorney-client communication and as such privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. s/ David A. Davis LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. DAVIS 4312 N. Classen Blvd. OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118 405 840-6353 405 557-0777 (FAX) ddavislaw@live.com<mailto:ddavislaw@live.com> ________________________________ From: Jon Miller <jonmiller@jem-pc.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 10:49 AM To: oama (oama@lists.imla.org) <oama@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] MUNICIPAL CODE INSPECTIONS Counselors: Have any of your cities created a process to require developers hire third party inspectors to conduct infrastructure inspections, like water, sewer, drainage and paving? Anyone seen any issues with the City requiring that a developer hire a third-party inspector to conduct infrastructure inspections and provide some type of a certification to the City that the infrastructure improvements meet city code and applicable professional construction requirements? Or, alternatively, requiring that the developer pay the direct costs of such an inspection to the contracted city engineers? Thanks, Jonathan E. Miller City Attorney City of Mustang 1885 Piedmont Road N., Suite B P.O. Box 546 Piedmont, Oklahoma 73078 Telephone: (405) 883-6266 Facsimile: (405) 883-6155 ******************************************************************************* This message is sent by a lawyer and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may not be distributed to any other person without written consent of the sender. Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

JK

Jordan, Kenneth

Tue, Mar 16, 2021 5:38 PM

I think you could require the permittee to perform the inspections via a third-party PE, with the PE to certify that the work was done in compliance with all city codes and with the approved plans as submitted to the city.

If the city performs the inspections, the fees are being levied pursuant the police power and should be based on the approximate cost to the city of the conducting the inspections. Assessing fees in excess of that makes the fee an invalid tax. OKC lost a similar case on police power license fees in 1979, the style is RED SLIPPER CLUB v. OKC. A police power fee based on the total cost of the public improvements being installed may or may not be excessive - but it’s not the correct legal standard.

I’ll send the citation to RED SLIPPER later today.

From: david davis ddavislaw@live.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 10:55:37 AM
To: Jon Miller jonmiller@jem-pc.com; oama@lists.imla.org oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] Re: MUNICIPAL CODE INSPECTIONS

The cities I have worked with charge an inspection fee equal to a percentage of the costs of the public improvements installed by developers. I believe the range to be 2 to 3 percent.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This transmission is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521 and intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is or may be an attorney-client communication and as such privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message.

s/ David A. Davis
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. DAVIS
4312 N. Classen Blvd.
OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118
405 840-6353
405 557-0777 (FAX)
ddavislaw@live.com mailto:ddavislaw@live.com

From: Jon Miller jonmiller@jem-pc.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 10:49 AM
To: oama (oama@lists.imla.org) oama@lists.imla.org
Subject: [Oama] MUNICIPAL CODE INSPECTIONS

Counselors:

Have any of your cities created a process to require developers hire third party inspectors to conduct infrastructure inspections, like water, sewer, drainage and paving?

Anyone seen any issues with the City requiring that a developer hire a third-party inspector to conduct infrastructure inspections and provide some type of a certification to the City that the infrastructure improvements meet city code and applicable professional construction requirements? Or, alternatively, requiring that the developer pay the direct costs of such an inspection to the contracted city engineers?

Thanks,

Jonathan E. Miller

City Attorney

City of Mustang

1885 Piedmont Road N., Suite B

P.O. Box 546

Piedmont, Oklahoma 73078

Telephone: (405) 883-6266

Facsimile: (405) 883-6155

This message is sent by a lawyer and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may not be distributed to any other person without written consent of the sender. Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain privileged and confidential information protected by law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or e-mail, destroy this message and delete any copies held in your electronic files. Unauthorized use and/or re-disclosure may subject you to penalties under applicable state and federal laws.

I think you could require the permittee to perform the inspections via a third-party PE, with the PE to certify that the work was done in compliance with all city codes and with the approved plans as submitted to the city. If the city performs the inspections, the fees are being levied pursuant the police power and should be based on the approximate cost to the city of the conducting the inspections. Assessing fees in excess of that makes the fee an invalid tax. OKC lost a similar case on police power license fees in 1979, the style is RED SLIPPER CLUB v. OKC. A police power fee based on the total cost of the public improvements being installed may or may not be excessive - but it’s not the correct legal standard. I’ll send the citation to RED SLIPPER later today. ________________________________ From: david davis <ddavislaw@live.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 10:55:37 AM To: Jon Miller <jonmiller@jem-pc.com>; oama@lists.imla.org <oama@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] Re: MUNICIPAL CODE INSPECTIONS The cities I have worked with charge an inspection fee equal to a percentage of the costs of the public improvements installed by developers. I believe the range to be 2 to 3 percent. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This transmission is protected by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521 and intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) This e-mail message is intended only for the personal use of the recipient(s) named above. This message is or may be an attorney-client communication and as such privileged and confidential. If you are not an intended recipient, you may not review, copy or distribute this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original message. s/ David A. Davis LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A. DAVIS 4312 N. Classen Blvd. OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 73118 405 840-6353 405 557-0777 (FAX) ddavislaw@live.com<mailto:ddavislaw@live.com> ________________________________ From: Jon Miller <jonmiller@jem-pc.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 10:49 AM To: oama (oama@lists.imla.org) <oama@lists.imla.org> Subject: [Oama] MUNICIPAL CODE INSPECTIONS Counselors: Have any of your cities created a process to require developers hire third party inspectors to conduct infrastructure inspections, like water, sewer, drainage and paving? Anyone seen any issues with the City requiring that a developer hire a third-party inspector to conduct infrastructure inspections and provide some type of a certification to the City that the infrastructure improvements meet city code and applicable professional construction requirements? Or, alternatively, requiring that the developer pay the direct costs of such an inspection to the contracted city engineers? Thanks, Jonathan E. Miller City Attorney City of Mustang 1885 Piedmont Road N., Suite B P.O. Box 546 Piedmont, Oklahoma 73078 Telephone: (405) 883-6266 Facsimile: (405) 883-6155 ******************************************************************************* This message is sent by a lawyer and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message and any attachments. This e-mail is intended for the addressee(s) only, and may not be distributed to any other person without written consent of the sender. Circular 230 disclosure: To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any U.S. federal tax advice contained in this communication (including attachments) is not intended or written to be used and cannot be used for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: This e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the person to which it is addressed and may contain privileged and confidential information protected by law. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone or e-mail, destroy this message and delete any copies held in your electronic files. Unauthorized use and/or re-disclosure may subject you to penalties under applicable state and federal laws.