County Permitting Process Questioned

A former candidate for Fayette County Judge raised concerns about the County’s building regulations at the Commissioners Court meeting last Wednesday, Nov. 23.

William Bernsen of Plum, who ran for the Republican nomination in the primary election earlier this year, addressed the Commissioners during the meeting’s public comment period about statements that County Inspector Clint Sternadel made at a meeting on Nov. 10. At that meeting, Sternadel answered questions from Commissioners about residents who build structures in unincorporated areas without applying for development permits from the County.

Sternadel said the County requires development permits to ensure that no structures are built in flood-prone areas.

“Any permanent structure over 200 square feet in the County, we do a permit for,” Sternadel said at the time. “It’s simple. They can come to the office or do it online. They can mail it to us. It’s very basic.

“It’s nothing to get in trouble for,” he added. “We’re not going to come down on anybody for it. It’s a compliance issue for the County. By us doing the development permit for all permanent structures, it makes the County eligible in the FEMA insurance world.

“So when we get natural disasters, Hurricane Harvey and things like that, buyouts, we’re eligible for funding and assistance

“We don’t do it to police what you’re doing,” Sternadel said. “We don’t care if you do it yourself. The main initiative behind it is where you are building, because a lot of the move-in folks are not aware of the many creeks in our County.”

Sternadel said the County does not ticket people if they failed to apply for a permit.

“Getting you to meet the code is the end goal,” he said.

At last Wednesday’s meeting, Bernsen said the County’s current administration may take a light-handed approach to compliance, but he argued that the regulations, on paper at least, dictate harsh penalties for noncompliance. He raised concerns that future County leaders could use the regulations to severely limit private property rights of citizens.

“What I heard was that you’ve got to permit any permanent structure in the County, and that it’s easy and it’s simple, and all we want is compliance. Even if you’re in mid-construction, it’s OK, just do it, there’s no penalty. And if it’s post-construction, the only penalty is you might have to move it,” Bernsen said. “But it’s not that simple.”

Bernsen read some of the County’s regulations, including the definition of “development,” which the County defines as “any man-made change to improved or unimproved real estate.”

“Think about the changes we make to real estate on a daily basis,” Bernsen said.

After the meeting, Bernsen told the Record that future County leaders might use that definition to regulate fences, gardens or other improvements to land.

Bernsen addressed Commissioners about Sternadel’s remarks concerning penalties. He said the regulations provide criminal charges for violators even if the current administration chooses not to pursue harsh penalties for non-compliance “No structure shall be constructed, no land shall be altered in the County, and if you do it’s a class C misdemeanor,” Bernsen said. “The civil penalty is a $100 a day fine, per violation. So if you have three non-confirming structures, that’s $300 a day. There’s a criminal penalty of $500 per day per violation.

“There are ugly penalties, and I want to remind the people that this government has enforced these regulations under the threat of jail time,” Bernsen added. “When Country Club Drive flooded (during Hurricane Harvey), people from this government walked up and down the road and threatened people with arrest if they tried to clean up their properties.”

The incidents that Bernsen referred to took place under the administration of the former County Judge.

Bernsen said he believes that citizens can trust the “reasonableness” of the current leaders in regard to development and regulation in the County. However, Bernsen said he worries how future leaders will enforce the regulations.

“What I’m more concerned about is the reasonableness of this piece of paper,” Bernsen said, holding a copy of the County’s development regulations. “This is what gets enforced in court. If they chose not to enforce it, that’s on them. What about the next court? What if the next court is not so reasonable?”

Under state law, a Commissioners Court may not immediately deliberate about issues that are brought to them during the public comment period of a meeting. If they chose to address the topic, discussion may not take place until they add it to the agenda of a future meeting. Accordingly, the Commissioners accepted Bernsen’s comments without discussion and moved on to the other items on that day’s agenda.