Rather than further hijack the other thread, found this while awandering and thought it raised some reallyyyyyyyyy interesting arguments (albeit with a sense of humor)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/publicresourceorg/sets/72157606911738805/show/with/2790563486/
PaulB
Replies
Those who followed the Veeck case were well aware of the import; the only disappointment was that the Supreme Court did not see fit to give the Appellate decision nationwide application.
Still, "PublicResource.Org" has done yeoman service in making codes truly public. The various code groups have tried to dance around Veeck, attempting to get their codes adopted 'by reference,' rather than simply adopted outright. IMO, this is a distinction without a difference and is doomed to failure - but that's a fight yet to be had.
One detail to be wary of are the local ammendments that are usually introduced to the codes when they are adopted. It's usually easy to identify these, and following good design principles will usually steer you clear of any rude surprises.
There is still a role for the publishing houses. The best example of this is the most public document of all, the Bible. Despite there being no copyright on the text, there are myriad versions at your local bookstore, and libraries filled with commentaries, indices, etc. - all enjoying some copyright protection, and the publishers are doing quite nicely.
Edited 11/30/2009 7:01 pm ET by renosteinke
In the case of the NEC, the handbook is a great resource but pretty pricy at $185 on CD. They are making a mint on that. I do think there is a definite scam quality to the way standards organizations and CEU vendors do business. NFPA and NEMA have surpassed IBEW as the most powerful organizations in the electrical industry.
In Florida the codes are law as they are adopted and recognized as part of the Florida Statutes.
The debate over paying for the code books and such is a hot topic everywhere it seems. While a set of code books is not cheap and places like the "publicresource" site that posts them for free is an ongoing debate, they have pretty much always been available online from the state site or similair. You could not print them from the site for the longest time but then even that changed.
So I do agree they are not cheap but I view it as a cost of doing business. Attorneys subscribe to West Law and buy law books which are not cheap and I pay a small fortune for text books at school which are a HUGE rip off but they are all just part of the game...and if you want to play, you have to pay.
The language of the ICC codes is incorporated in statute in Florida but the NEC is just referenced. I think the only amendment to the NEC now is the "bonding steel stud" rule.
They had changed the pool deck bonding rules to match the 2008 rule while we were still on the 2005 but that was rescinded when the 2008 was adopted.
Of course, one could make the argument that a "free" code resource just means that it is paid for by all taxpayers rather than at the cash register of the ICC/NFPA store.
Jon Blakemore RappahannockINC.com Fredericksburg, VA
It's always amusing to see politicians announcing funding for some project as though they were donating their own money not ours.
"Always available ....."
THAT was exactly the issue with the Veeck case. Veeck administered web sites for several communities, and put up the local codes - which were largely based upon 'model' codes.
One code group, the SBCCI, served him with a 'cease and desist' order. He sued to have the order overturned. With that, every imagnable code group filed 'friend of the court' briefs supporting the SBCCI.
When the lower court gave Veeck the brush-off, Veeck appealed. The 'first look' at the case by one member of the court supported the SBCCI; only when Veeck asked for hearing by the full court did he prevail; the opinion if the full court was quite blunt, and agreed with Veeck's arguments in the strongest of terms.
In short, we owe what access we have to Mr. Veeck. The code groups continue to fight this at every turn; several sites similar to PublicResource have been shut down over the issue. The code groups have been quite explicit; they're just waiting until they can find a friendly judge, in another jurisdiction, to re-open the issue.
Good for Mr. Veeck (and all of us).
Maybe it's me, but I feel the code making bodies have become an extension of the sales and marketing departments for major electrical component manufacturers. What better way to make your latest products sell then make them a code requirement? So let's pay for their sales/marketing "brochures" (read "code books" that tell us we have to use their latest gadgets.
Ex... If I don't have children, do I want to pay the added expense for tamper-resistant outlets in new construction? No. But do I have a choice now? No. And do the manufacturers make more margin off these new outlets then the old? I'd wager a lot of money that the answer is "yes". But it's all done for the common good I'm sure...
If they are allowed to charge us for the codes, they should be able to charge all of us to read any law enacted by congress.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
As I said I don't mind paying for code books...I just wish there was better enforcement and stricter penalities for breaking the rules.
I sit on the local building board and our biggest hand is to suspend a guy's license. Big deal...most of the crooks and theives don't even have one! We have no say over unlicensed guys who could care less about codes. Its left to the HO to sue the guy. How effective is that?
What good is a code if there is no way to enforce it?
"Its left to the HO to sue the guy. How effective is that"It's fairly effective. More people should do it.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Yeah Blue except like in a situation we had last month. Guy walked away leaving an infinished job. Took $14k of the folks money. They are already in a low income level so really cannot afford the likely $4-5k is going to take an attorney to get their money back. In the meantime they have a gutted kitchen and bathroom and have had to move out of their home.
I really don't know what recourse they have aside from sueing but how can they afford it?
It seems like a hopeless situation.
"In the meantime they have a gutted kitchen and bathroom and have had to move out of their home.I really don't know what recourse they have aside from sueing but how can they afford it?It seems like a hopeless situation."How would codes help that? That is a civil matter between two private parties. Bringing in the government to "help" them is wrong because the government's job isn't to protect every homeowner from themselves. The lady shouldn't have paid so much money up front. She should have checked references etc.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Yeah but guess what Blue...we see about 10 cases like this PER MONTH.
You and I know they shouldn't have paid up front but the avg homeowner doesn't.
Your building department can't red-tag jobs?
k
KFC,
Oh sure but like in the above situation I just replied to Blue, a $77. red tag helps the homeowners in no way at all.
I know thats not really a code related issue but it does go back to the fact the guy who ran off the job was unlicensed and most of the work he has done so far has violated the code.
Mike
I guess I was thinking of the unlicensed guys who are bending the rules a bit too much- a red tag'll stop the job and any progress payments, which is a pretty big deterrent to some.
But, as you say, if they've already skeedaddled, red-tagging the job won't do much.
k
KFC,
Where our issues start are the unlicensed guys not being flat out busted for being an unlicensed contractor in a state which boasts about how much they control licensure.
The minute they are identified as such, they should get a red tag like you mentioned as well as be fined for being unlicensed. Here its a misdemeanor which although seemingly petty should be enforced. Problem is law enforcement is already stretched thin so there aren't enough people to go around.
Yeah, I think it's similar all over. The state board here does a few well publicized stings every year, but I've never actually seen anyone get busted, and unlicensed guys are everywhere, advertising, you name it.
Laws without enforcement suck. It's a big competitive disadvantage for rule followers. I often feel like a sap for not aggressively cheating.
k
I think the first step should be to get some of the code enforcement people LEO certified. Then they can be deputized and make arrests.
That would allow the real cops to stay at what we want them to be doing, protecting our tools ;-).
You are describing something Stalin might approve of.
http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Thats not a bad idea. The ones here have LEO powers but refuse to use them due to liability issues. They will go into someone yard and use their authority to bypass No Tresspassing signs but thats about it.
I would like to see them walk on a site and either issue an immediate citaion like a cop could do or even issue some means of warrant.
After all, these guys are stealing from you and me!
What are you talking about "stealing from you and me?". You're going a bit overboard with this. They may have stolen from Granny Smith...but unless you're wearing her apron...you ain't her!http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Read my post right above where a little bit of each license and permit goes to pay for this kind of activity.
Blue,
Here is the Fla Statute. I agree its not much but we are paying!
489.140 Florida Homeowners' Construction Recovery Fund.--There is created the Florida Homeowners' Construction Recovery Fund as a separate account in the Professional Regulation Trust Fund. The recovery fund shall be funded out of the receipts deposited in the Professional Regulation Trust Fund from the one-half cent per square foot surcharge on building permits collected and disbursed pursuant to s. 468.631.
Mike
If they are on someone's property without a warrant or a permit open (implied consent) they are trespassing, cops or not.
We had a muni court judge at our "law" CEU course a few years ago that shocked a lot of inspectors with that statement. (BOAF conference in St Pete Beach)
Legally an inspector can't come onto your property to investigate unpermitted activity if the owner tells them they can't. The no trespassing sign says that. When you take out the permit you are giving consent for inspection. No permit, no consent.
If you can see the violation from the street you have probable cause to investigate but if you have to go up to the house and look in the window or enter the house without being invited, you will lose if this goes to criminal court. The inspector might even be liable for an action by the homeowner.
That was what we were told by a judge.In Lee County they really seem a lot more interested in tax revenue than unpermitted activity anyway. The tax assessor finds things all the time that the building department never heard about. It just shows up on your tax bill next year. LEEPA uses satellite pictures in addition to the usual on site inspection.
Here in Texas, because of our Castle Doctrine, we get to shoot "tresspassers". We just had cop tell us that if we see someone jump the fence into our yard, we can drop him! I love Texas....but I don't tresspass!http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Licensing the guy doesn't make him honest. Why shouldn't I be able to hire anyone I want to work on my house. Why don't I have the right to hire an unlicensed carpenter? Or an unlicensed plumber? I believe I have the right to hire an unlicensed brain surgeon.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Well thats a fine thought if you live in a state which doesn't make licensed guys pay. And I agree to an extent somewhat about who I hire.
HOWEVER being I AM a licensed contractor and pay significantly to maintain that each year, I HAVE to enforce the idea that of you are acting as a contractor, you NEED to be a licensed one. Part of each license fee and permit goes to supplement the states recovery fund to pay homeowners who have been ripped off. So in essence I am paying for othert peoples downfalls. So darn right I want everyone playing by the same rules!
If my state didn't require a license, I might feel otherwise but if I have to play by the rules, I feel so should everyone else!
I happen to live in a state that doesn't require everyone and everything to be licensed, permitted and inspected. I'm living in a house right now that was built with no building permits. Things are okay here. It's not perfect but it's not bad either. If I was the original buyer, I probably would have made a few changes. The point is that we are over-regulated and we have become a nanny community. We need a nanny to do everything for us, including handling our remodeling projects.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Oh, I agree Blue many things are overregulated but being I can't do much about that, I figure I am at least going to push for everyone to play by the same rules I have to play by.
I do think sometimes less rules and government might be better but being it gave me a nice paycheck for a number of years, I can't bad mouth it too much! :)
"I figure I am at least going to push for everyone to play by the same rules I have to play by."You are paddling in the wrong direction.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
""I figure I am at least going to push for everyone to play by the same rules I have to play by."
You are paddling in the wrong direction."
Well I'm not sure about that Blue. You make it sound like anyone who is law abiding and plays by the rules is naive. Is that a Texas attitude? LOL
Edited 12/3/2009 10:26 pm ET by Oak River Mike
No. I mean that your call for further regulation and interference by big government is the wrong way to paddle. You should be calling for less interference so you can work, legally, without a license and permit. It works here just fine. It's called "buyer beware". We are responsible for ourselves. We don't rely on some bureaucrat, who may, or may not, be competent. In fact, Texas just let our Residential Building Registration system pass on without being renewed. Thank you Texas! That's $500 less that I have to send the state this year. Contrast that to MI, who now wants a guy like MASA, get a builder's license and if he chooses to operate in an LLC, that needs a builder's license too. Back in 1973, when I first started following politics (because I had to pay too much in taxes), I remember the head of the MI Department of Licensing and Regulation recommended that the state remove almost all of the regulatory requirements for the various business to be licensed. I think he recommended that we keep 3 of the 40 or 50. It made sense then and it makes sense now. http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Oh, OK I gotchya...I misunderstood.
Yes, I do think it would be better if folks were made to be more responsible for themselves instead of thinking someone will take care of them and watch their back.
Yeah, that de-regulated cowboy attitude seems to be working great there at the new stadium... what's a paralyzed coach (and worker) or two...
k
I don't know what stadium you are referring to. But, I can answer your "deregulation" crack.Having a license doesn't make anyone safer. Not having a license doesn't make anyone safer either. If someone dies or is paralyzed, they and their heirs have to same rights to sue whether the employer is licensed or unlicensed. Basically, licenses were created so that lawyers and other desk jockeys, could squeeze out the hard working tradesmen. Guys that spent their life's work learning how to build, are shut out of the building business because they don't know that there are 9 members on the licensing board...and that they have 30 days to notify the department if they move....and that blah, blah, blah. I went to builder's school and learned how to pass the test. It didn't teach me one thing about how to build. Builders licensing is nothing more than a money grab and a mechanism to eliminate tradesmen from the opportunity to maximize their profit on their trade. The poor slob, low life tradesmen make pennies while the white collar "licensed" business guys make dollars. http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Edited 12/4/2009 9:11 pm by jimAKAblue
Don't you think it's odd that an unlicensed guy could build a 100 story commercial building but would be arrested for contracting a shed? That is the way it is in many states.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
Regulation+enforcement=good.
deregulation=bad
regulation-enforcement=badGot it?Love,
k
Deregulation? You just changed the subject.http://thewoodshedtavern.com. = no peer mods!
You're not suggesting that Simpson has anything to do with codes that require hangers, hurricane clips, post connectors, etc.?
I don't think it has as much to do with "Simpson" as it does "Andrew", "Hugo" and "Charlie".
You don't need all that iron, even in florida
Catfish,
Well I think they do add some value and usage to a home. Sure some of it is overkill but the groups I do consulting for have done studies and shown that having the connectors increases the stucture's wind resistance and uplift.
When you look at the cost per value received, I think they are a good component of a home.
...and I know you know its not iron...but just for the record, its not. :)
Mike
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4nLwwXhEag
k
p.s. 1:34 is the fun partEdited 12/4/2009 3:18 pm by KFC <!-- KFC1002 -->
Edited 12/4/2009 3:18 pm by KFC
When I came here, I built a 4/12 roof over my MIL porch. Didn't know anything about the clips. Nailed everything with ring-shank galvanized nails.
Been thru Erin, Opal, Ivan, Dennis and been fine. Plus the small tropicals and hurricanes. And trusses do probably need clipped. But my house built in 1948, no damage since Camille.
Right on the coast they probably need it.