Should re-roofing a house require a $50 permit?

The issue had come up earlier. On Monday, city manager Clarence Bryant reported on his research.

“Talking to the state and to others, some people do (require permits), some don’t,” Bryant summarized. But that depends, he continued on exactly what happens on the roofing job. Commerce currently requires a $50 permit and two inspections — one when the felt is put down and the other when the job is finished.

“If a roofer goes out to your house and takes old shingles off and puts new shingles on, the state really doesn’t care,” Bryant said. “But if a roofer removes one board, he must have a permit. I don’t know any roofer who is going to stop what he’s doing when he pulls off half a board and will come in and get a permit. They’re not getting permits now.”

Bryant reminded the council of a recent case where a man re-roofed a lot of buildings in town without a permit, and many of the jobs — including the one at Ward 2 councilman Darren Owensby’s house — were not done properly.

The problem facing the city is that a lot of contractors do not buy the permit. If they’re caught, they’re fined $150 — three times the permit cost.
“That’s not very punitive to me,” declared Ward 4 councilman Clark Hill.

Mayor Charles L. Hardy Jr. agreed. “They’ll just turn around and bill it to the homeowner,” he said.

Mayor pro tem Keith Burchett was the advocate of dropping the requirement for roofing permits.

“The citizens feel like changing shingles on a house is regular maintenance like painting a house,” he said, adding that “the majority” of jobs do not require any structural changes.

Bryant disagreed, arguing that most of the time some work on the roof itself is needed.

The council discussed the issue of enforcement. Hardy, Hill and Johnny Eubanks appeared to favor hefty fines for those contractors who do not follow the requirements of the law.

“Somebody trying to play by the rules is at a definite disadvantage,” Burchett offered.

“The contractors know they’re supposed to get a permit,” said Hill.

“But they don’t get it,” responded Bryant.

“Let there be some meat in (the enforcement),” Hill countered.

Hardy suggested a stiff fine for contractors who do not call for the inspection when the felt is down. Eubanks agreed.

The council did not resolve the matter. As of the end of the work session, Bryant said he would take a further look at “the punitive side” of the ordinance.