Local government review of commercial building plans. (FE)
The implications of AB198 include potentially streamlining the commercial construction process by decentralizing the review power to local governments, thus expediting approvals for smaller projects. Moreover, the bill repeals the existing fee forwarding requirement that mandated some local units of government to forward collected fees to the DSPS. This change is designed to alleviate financial burdens on local governments and encourage them to take on more responsibilities regarding building inspections and plan reviews. Additionally, the bill includes a requirement for the DSPS to submit a plan aimed at supporting local governments in these endeavors by January 2024.
Assembly Bill 198 focuses on the local government review of commercial building plans in Wisconsin. This bill aims to enhance the capacity of local authorities to conduct commercial building plan examinations by increasing the thresholds for such reviews. Under the current law, specific cities and appointed agents of the Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS) have the authority to review building plans, but AB198 allows non-agent local governments to perform these examinations for buildings below certain volume thresholds, specifically those under 100,000 cubic feet. This intended policy change is a response to the recognition that local governments often possess the necessary knowledge and expertise to handle smaller scale projects effectively.
While proponents view the bill as a means to empower local governments and improve the efficiency of the commercial building review process, opponents may argue against it on various grounds. Potential concerns could include the adequacy of oversight and regulation, particularly regarding the competency of local officials to handle the increased responsibility without the benefit of state oversight. Furthermore, raising the threshold for local plan reviews could lead to inconsistencies in building standards across different local jurisdictions, sparking debate over the balance between local autonomy and state control in construction regulation.