To follow up on our podcast from several weeks about building permits, we invited building official Andy Schreder with Rum River Construction Consultants onto the show to discuss everything we may have been wrong about in our previous episode. Either we got most of it right or Andy was really nice because we didn’t discuss much from the previous episode.
Andy did offer some very interesting insight into the whole building inspections program, however, and even made a good case for cities to use private building officials, rather than running their own programs in-house.
Andy also discusses some of the most common items that building officials require, but have no legal right to require. What a treat it was to have Andy on the show. He’ll surely become a regular guest.
TRANSCRIPTION
The following is a transcription from an audio recording. Although the transcription is largely accurate, in some cases it may be slightly incomplete or contain minor inaccuracies due to inaudible passages or transcription errors.
Andy Schreder: And then came to the realization about four years ago that the best way to provide the service of building code and inspections is through a private business. So Rum River Construction Consultants has been in existence since about 2009. I started doing education and continuing education for contractors and other code officials.
Bill Oelrich: Welcome, everybody. You’re listening to Structure Talk, a Structure Tech… My name is Bill Oelrich, alongside Tessa Murry and Reuben Saltzman, as always, the three legs of this stool, actually, at Structure Talk. And on today’s episode, we have a special guest by the name of Andy Schreder, who owns a company called Rum River Construction Consultants. And Andy is a building code consultant. And so we have an authority-having jurisdiction in our midst today, and we are going to pepper him with code questions.
Reuben Saltzman: We did a podcast on building codes, and we did this several weeks ago, and I think the title was ‘Building Inspection Permits: Necessary Evil or Added Value?’ Or something like that. And we talked a lot about permits, and I shared the limited amount of info that I had on permits. And then Andy and I met together like the day after we had recorded it. I said, “Andy, you’re actually an expert on this. We need to get you on the show. And maybe you can just set the record straight, like you could listen to the podcast that we recorded, you could take notes and go, “Oh, he’s wrong about this, wrong about this.” Set the record straight for us.” So that’s part of the reason Andy’s here.
BO: Introduce yourself, and tell our audience a little bit about your background and how you got to where you’re at.
AS: Well, thank you, I really appreciate the opportunity, Reuben and Bill, and Tessa as well. It’s been a very interesting path. I was a union carpenter for a number of years, and due to a workplace incident, we’ll call it, I was hurt on the job and I needed to look at a different career, and building code came to me as a possible path and I grabbed it. I went to North Hennepin Community College for night school for a couple of years through their BIT program, it’s called Building Inspection Technologies, and graduated from there with a certificate, basically, and that’s how I started down this path. And from there, I worked for a number of municipalities, starting as an intern in Monticello in the early 2000s, and then worked through, as most inspectors do, kind of hopping around to a few different jurisdictions. And then things went south in ’08. Things really took a big adjustment as far as how building codes were applied through different municipalities.
AS: I picked up with another jurisdiction after the slowdown, and then came to the realization about four years ago that the best way to provide the service of building codes and inspections is through a private business. So Rum River Construction Consultants has been in existence since about 2009. I started doing education and continuing education for contractors and other code officials. But then again, about four years ago, I came to the realization that I really wanted to have more control over the end product, because working directly for a municipality, you are really tied to their processes, as far as adjusting to workflows and workloads, and things like that. So Rum River Construction Consultants, as a private entity doing consulting work, in this regard, started about four years ago. Now we’ve grown to the point where we have about 12 different contracts with municipalities in varying capacities.
BO: So you touched on something that I didn’t realize, that there was a change in the inspection environment after 2008. What did that entail?
AS: Absolutely. Municipalities have become very reluctant to hire the number of inspectors, really, that are required to do a good job. I’ll just say it that way. Worried about the next downturn, worried about laying people off, unemployment, and things like that. So I noticed a distinct change in attitudes since 2008, where municipalities are reluctant, again, to staff up in order to respond to the increase in building activity, and that’s why this business formation has worked out so well.
RS: Now, I gotta ask, Andy, I’m going down a path now, but when I took my course, I did the same program, the BIT program, and I remember, during our legal aspects of code administration class, we talked a lot about money coming in for permits and how that money is supposed to cover the cost of building inspections. And I think I touched on this on our podcast, on this, building inspection departments are the only revenue-positive department at the city. And I guess what I’m getting at is if there are cities that are reluctant to hire the right staff, then what the heck are they doing with the money?
AS: That’s a question that’s best posed to them. It is. It is, because I can be accountable for the work that we do. Every year, there’s a reporting mechanism to the Department of Labor and Industry about revenues received and expenditures, and as a private business, I need to do this reporting process just like a municipality would. And I feel very strongly about this, as you and I talked about before, Reuben, in that we need to demonstrate, at the end of the day, how we spent that applicant’s money. Some jurisdictions charge very minimal fee, like $40 for a siding permit, and other jurisdictions charge a value-based permit fee, which is $400. And that discrepancy is one of the areas where the building departments are getting a very significant black eye, and understandably so, because as you illustrated, the Building Code, Chapter 1300, in particular, states that permit fees shall be commensurate or equal to the service provided. So, at the end of the process, we need to explain and demonstrate how somebody is going to get their service for the fee that they’ve paid. Now, of course, $40 is not enough to properly administer a permit, so there are other funds that are utilized to subsidize that permit, and a municipality has the ability to do that. But more concerning is the excess fees.
AS: So if a jurisdiction charges $400 for a siding permit, they’re pretty hard-pressed, in my experience, to show where that money went, where that money was spent. And so that shell game, if you wanna call it that, that process is really best left to them because I don’t know how one would accurately demonstrate how it takes $400 to process a siding permit and to do the required inspection.
RS: I’m reading between the lines.
Tessa Murry: Yeah. It’s so strange that there’s not just this like industry standard or like a set price across the board, you know, state-wide.
AS: You’re right, Tessa, and there’s a committee called the Uniformity Committee. I’m a member of that and I’ve been there for a number of years. And that’s one of the subjects that we try to touch on, but it is such a hot button issue, not too many people wanna touch it. And I think that, again, it’s everybody’s responsibility from the building, from this side, I’ll say, as far as building code administrators, to do their best to make sure that the fees are, again, equal to the service that’s provided. That’s the very basis of it. For example, again, the value-based maintenance permit for roofing, siding, and windows, it’s very difficult to show how does it cost that much. So that’s where that positive money is left unaccounted for.
BO: Do you think that’s why there’s an attitude, somewhat, by homeowners or other people that, “Well, the building inspector looked at it, so it should be all signed, sealed, delivered, and the workmanship should be great.”
AS: Yes. Thanks for bringing that up because I did wanna touch on something. It’s so important to avoid generalizations. And we’re all subject to that, we’re all guilty of that. But certainly, we’ve got to avoid, in my opinion, the generalizations of public works employees sleeping in cul-de-sacs or general contractors that perform storm restoration, that they’re all crooked and just after the money. Those generalizations aren’t accurate and they’re not fair. So there are building departments that work very hard to make sure the fees that are charged are equal to that service, but they only have so much say in that matter. The elected officials, city councils, and town board supervisors are the ones that set the fees. The state suggests things, they have some input to that, but ultimately, it’s up to each city, county, and township to adopt what’s called a fee schedule, and those fees are identified in that fee schedule. So that’s how it starts at the local level.
BO: Okay. So let’s back up a little bit. You got hurt on a job, you went back in, you got your building inspector license, and you went out into the field. What was the most interesting thing you learned in the first month? And what was the most eye-opening, like “I had no idea,” that you ran across in the first month?
AS: Fantastic question. The biggest thing I learned early on was when I worked for the City of Monticello. Building official at the time was Fred Patch, and I just left a job with him 10 minutes ago, and he’s been instrumental in my career, and I don’t mind saying that because I’m very happy to have mentored under him, and continue to be friends. The most important thing I learned was, at the very beginning, Mr. Patch reminded me that any time you write a correction, any time you ask an applicant, whether it be a licensed general contractor or a homeowner, to write the code section next to that item. That taught me two things. First of all, taught me how to navigate the code, how to look things up, what book to go to, plumbing, mechanical, building, what chapter in those codes would you reference, but also, more importantly, it taught me that we shouldn’t be requiring things of people that are not established in the code. I could offer my opinion, absolutely, but if I’m gonna write something down and require you to do something, I need to be able to back that up. And that’s something I carry with me to this day. I either physically write the code section next to a correction or I am prepared… Because I know the code section, I’m prepared to provide that, should that be brought up.
TM: The fact that you have to say that, Andy, does that imply that there are code officials out there that are requesting people to do things that are not in the code?
AS: Yes. In short answer, yes. There are building officials that require things that are not in the code, and there are other professions that do things outside or swim outside of their lane, or as Mike Goldenstein would say, play outside of their sandbox. So, yes, absolutely, that’s something that happens, Tessa. And there’s a significant movement that friends and colleagues of mine, we’re working very hard to not only do the right thing, but also try to encourage others that are coming into the industry that this is the way things really are intended to perform, to make sure that you don’t require things that are not law.
RS: Can you give us some example of one of these things that often gets required, but is not required?
AS: Oh, sure. Here’s a softball, at the bottom of the stair landing of the deck. This happens quite frequently where a building inspector will call out a landing of concrete or pavers. The code does require a landing at the bottom of a stair, but there’s nothing that says that landing has to be impervious surface, that it has to be concrete or paving stones. A bottom landing can be grassed as long as it is as wide as the stair, three feet in the direction of travel, and the riser height is no more than seven and three-quarter and no more than three-eighth inch variants, all of that. So that’s a good example of where a lot of inspectors say that landing has to be concrete or impervious surface, and that’s not supported by the code.
TM: Interesting. Give us one more. [chuckle] I’m just curious.
AS: Okay. Well, there’s a lot of things. If you’re coming from the garage into the house, this is a very interesting one, Tessa, is that the code just identifies riser heights, and it isn’t as clear as one would want as far as where to measure it from. One has to go to what’s called the Code and Commentary. There’s an illustration that shows that measurement to come from the top of the threshold. So that’s all over the board, as far as where people measure from. Very seldom does anybody step on the top of that threshold when they’re entering or exiting the garage. More often, people step over that and into the interior floor. So, a lot of times, building inspectors, it varies as far as where that measurement comes from. If it’s off the leading edge of the threshold, if it’s off the top of the threshold, or is it the interior floor, that’s kind of all over the board.
BO: So if we just wanted to kind of paint a picture for anybody who’s listening, what you’re saying is that piece of wood that goes in-between the sides of the door will raise up that last step clearance. So you might be walking up a normal stair, thinking, “Oh, my foot’s cleared, my foot’s cleared,” and then you get to the last walking into the house and you gotta lift your foot another three-quarters of an inch to not stumble. Is that what you’re saying?
AS: Yes, sir, that’s a great point, thanks, Bill, is in order to paint that picture or to illustrate it, if you’re walking down a set of stairs, the code stipulates that there’s to be no more than a three-eighths inch variants in the riser height, because I think we’ve all gone downstairs, where you develop the cadence, if you will. You’re going down 7.5, 7.5, and all of a sudden nine, or even shorter than that, you can feel it in the small of your back. And that’s what we’re trying to avoid, is any disruption to that cadence as somebody’s going up or down the stairs. That’s the riser height.
RS: And don’t the numbers say that stairs are certainly the most dangerous thing that we have in a home?
AS: Yes. I don’t know the percentages, but I believe you’re right.
RS: Falls and accidents are the number one cause of injuries at home. And what’s the number one place it’s gonna happen? It’s on a stairway.
BO: So I’m gonna dig into my orthopedics background here, and one of the words I remember from orthopedics was ‘proprioception’, which is your body’s understanding of where your limbs are in space. And I’m sure somebody will correct me on that, but sometimes, after people get a total joint, they lose a little bit of their feeling of where their limbs are in space. And the last thing you wanna do when you just have a brand new hip stem is jam your foot into a concrete floor that you didn’t realize was an inch farther. You can drive that stem into places where it doesn’t belong, which is farther down the shaft. Anyway, that’s a left turn onto a weird road. I know I took you guys out of the context here, but that’s how my mind works sometimes.
TM: We love learning new stuff, Bill.
BO: Yeah, that’s for sure. [chuckle]
RS: We’ve gone down a rabbit hole. We started this with just saying, “Andy, what did we get wrong on the last one?” We haven’t even touched on that yet, have we?
AS: No. And I don’t know if we go down that road, we won’t get very far, but just, again, I am rather biased in this because this is my profession, this is the company that feeds a number of families, we have a number of employees now. And I take it very seriously, because, in my estimation, in my experience, there is a very significant public need and public benefit of having permits, to have, again, that fresh set of eyes for the permit fee, whatever that might be, and that’s a separate conversation, but to have somebody in there, again, to make sure the person doing the work is either the homeowner, has a vested interest in the property, or is a licensed contractor, that’s a big one. Then, in addition to that, that there’s a certain set of standards that come into play. Riser height is one of them, the number of connectors on a B-vent for a flue, for a furnace, that somebody may not be aware of because they didn’t get a permit or the contractor overlooked it, or something like that.
AS: There’s a real public benefit to this process, and as I have learned, and now demonstrating, the best way to provide that service is through a private entity. I’ve worked for municipalities for so many years, and nothing against that. Minneapolis and some of the larger municipality, it’s very hard, if not impossible, for a private entity to take that on. However, the best way to respond to an increased economy, seasonal building trends, is through a private entity. We had an inspector leave us at one point, and I was able to interview within a few days, and that’s something that no jurisdiction municipality can respond that quickly.
AS: I think it was last year, last spring, we realized that so many of our areas had rural and nature bedroom communities, and things like that, that we opened up Saturday inspection, no additional fee, no additional… Just call me and we’ll be out there on a Saturday. And I mentioned that to some of my colleagues again in the municipal setting, there’s no way that they can do that. They cannot respond in that manner. So we’re able to do Saturday inspections. We can be out at 7:00 in the morning. One of our inspectors, Grant, he doesn’t mind working late, so if a homeowner is doing their own deck and they wanted an inspection at 5:00 in the afternoon or 6 o’clock at night, we try not to get too crazy in that regard, but if that’s important to the applicant, we’re able to provide that, where a municipality cannot.
BO: I like that. See, I’d work on California time, sleep late, go to bed late. I think I could live in your world pretty easily, Andy.
TM: Me too.
AS: And again, I’m rather biased in this, but that just shows, Tessa and I have been talking recently about education, and that’s another business avenue that we’re able to pursue. I started teaching building code in, again, about 2009 to licensed general contractors and other code officials. And there’s no better way to get good at a subject than have to teach it to somebody else. So we’ve been doing that for a number of years.
BO: What does a cocktail party look like with a bunch of municipal inspectors going on? You know what I mean? Do you guys talk about anything other than code?
RS: Everybody brings their code book.
[laughter]
AS: There are some code geeks. And in fact, we’ve employed one, and they’re always… I call them the Cliff Clavin of the party because they’re always full of interesting facts and figures. But lastly, I just wanted to mention too, is the latest thing we’ve been doing is called the Building Code Compliance Assessment. And I don’t know if you’re aware of it, but the code is a statewide standard, that’s what it’s termed, is a statewide standard. So even the municipalities that have not adopted the code and enforced the code still have this applicable to their project. So, if a contractor or a homeowner builds a deck in Pokegama Township, they don’t issue building permits, that project is still required to meet the same code parameters as one built in Coon Rapids. It’s a statewide standard. So what we found is a very significant need for contractors and homeowners to have a connection to the code, and that’s what we’re doing through what’s called a BCCA, or a Building Code Compliance Assessment. A contractor or a homeowner can engage us on a particular project and we can help them navigate that building code for their particular project. It’s working out quite well.
BO: So I have a question related to that. Let’s just say I own a cabin on a lake, and I wanna rebuild my cabin…
RS: Wait, no. You mean a friend who has a cabin, you mean, Bill?
BO: Yes. Yes, and I was gonna help him. And let’s say that friend’s partner is really into things that look old and… Like open stud cavities, and things of that nature. Can I help that friend build a substandard building, in terms that doesn’t have the full thickness insulation in the sidewall to achieve the specific aesthetic that my partner’s looking for?
AS: That’s an interesting question as well. Just remember that whoever the property owner is, they’re ultimately responsible for what happens on their property. If they allow or engage somebody to do work, knowingly or unknowingly, that’s a violation of the code. That’s really something that they need to be accountable for. The energy code, as important as it is, might be looked at a little differently than life safety provision. Again, back to the stairs or smoke alarms, carbon monoxide alarms. Tessa, you and I started talking about airs the other day, combustion air, make up air, ventilation air, distribution air. Those things, life safety elements, I think, rise to the surface as far as the subjects that we’re gonna identify as most important. The R-value of a wall, certainly from energy conservation and continuity of air barriers, that’s all very, very important. However, if there’s only so much time in a day, I think we’re gonna concentrate on some of those more significant, I’ll say, life safety issues, venting, avoiding back-drafting. And now, in extension of the energy code, however, that I would bring into this conversation is the fact that we’re tightening this envelope up so significantly.
AS: The blower door tests that are required and those cabins that are maybe retrofitted over the years to be more… Tighter and tighter, we need to recognize the importance of ventilation air. And if we don’t have enough ventilation air, what is that doing to our indoor air quality, because otherwise, we’re just essentially breathing our own exhaust air. We’re depleting the air of the space. The best example is having a wood-burning stove in a fish house, one can envision that you’re depleting the oxygen because of that stove. And the space isn’t very large, so it’s not hard to envision that oxygen being depleted. So just take that on a bigger scale, and that ventilation air is critical when it comes to any structure, especially these residential structures that are being tightened up more and more due to energy code provision.
RS: Now, Andy, just to follow up on that, let’s say this person, we’ll name him Schmill [laughter], decided to go through and just rebuild this cabin from the ground-up, and used 2 x 4 walls and the stuff that you couldn’t do if you’re pulling permits way up wherever, or way down whatever this might be…
AS: Winona.
RS: Yeah, that’s it. What potential consequences could this homeowner face for just doing all of this without pulling permits, and it’s just done? What next?
AS: There’s really no significant ramifications, in my experience, especially in the rural settings or out in the cabins. You’re really subject to your own decisions, look at it that way. If you do work on a cabin where there are no inspections or you do the work on a Saturday night where the inspectors are gone, or whatever, you’re really subject to your own decision. So if you have Aunt Edna come over, and she goes down the deck stairs and the stairs are not consistent, and that bottom landing is 10 inches because you haven’t brought the grade up, and she jams her back, you’re gonna be accountable for that, as the homeowner.
AS: If there’s any accountability to be had, it’s you, as the owner. There are some jurisdictions around the metro area that are a little bit more proactive, in the sense that if they see work going on without a permit, they’ll address it. And they do, in some cases, have the ability to write a ticket, although that’s very few and far between, in my experience, at least, for a municipality to issue a ticket for work without a permit. It’s more along the lines of what we have adopted, is to educate, inspect and document. So, as a means of educating, say, “Excuse me there, Sir Schmill… ” Was that your name? “It looks like you had done work without a permit. In accordance with Minnesota State Building Code, permits are required. So we’ve educated. If we are compelled to go out to do an inspection, we will document what you’ve done, and then again, we’ll save that in the city records so that it’s at least documented. There’s really not much to say other than that, especially in the rural parts of the state where there’s a different level of appreciation for the code.
BO: Well, so full disclosure, I do plan to give building permits. I have applied for communication through my county, and what I really wanted to do was use three-and-half-inch foil-backed installation. I wanna have a thermal break… Listen to this technology, Tessa, at the exterior. So I wanna build my 2 x 4 walls, put my sheething, that’s gonna be beautiful log half siding or something, then make a sandwich and have a beautiful batten exterior, but I’m only at like R-13, and I’m feeling a little bad about that. So…
TM: That’s another podcast.
[laughter]
RS: They’re gonna shut you down.
BO: Yeah. Well, I’m pretty easy to shut down. So we’re still in the design phase, so I haven’t broken any rules yet.
RS: Good. Good.
BO: But I will have mechanical makeup air because we are gonna have a stove, a wood-burning stove. And I do want to actually have enough air to breathe. I’m hearing, I’m hearing what you guys are saying. I’m following.
RS: Awesome.
AS: That might be a whole ‘nother subject, is wood-burning stoves, and the amount of combustion air that’s required. We’ve actually had a few new construction projects come up with an open-hearth proposed, and there’s no way they could make it work. There’s just no way to pass the blower door test and provide enough ventilation air, or people air, as it’s also known, due to the fact of an open hearth. You really need to be looking at closed combustion. But again, like Tessa and I, I don’t wanna geek out on this, but that’s just another subject that’s dear to my heart.
BO: I love it when we geek out, ’cause it takes us to a very special place where people start tuning out, they’re like, ” Oh, the geeks are here.” But it’s not bad, it’s not bad, Andy. Reuben, Tessa, you have any questions?
RS: Yeah. Was there anything else from that last podcast that we gotta address, Andy? Anything you gotta set the record straight on? ‘Cause we covered a lot of stuff there.
AS: You certainly did cover a lot of stuff, and I would love, like you and I, Reuben, when we had lunch the other day, and Tessa, when you and I talked, this needs to be a continuing conversation, a relationship, if you will. It’s very difficult to try to encapsulate all the conversations into a short timeframe like this. I guess I would just want to stress the fact that this is all about building relationships and having a better appreciation or understanding of the role of the code official. We are trained. In our instance, we’re combination inspectors, so we look at plumbing mechanical as well as building itself, but to ask the questions, because most inspectors, I would say, and most of them that I know are there to be of assistance, of a resource. Why is this required? That’s the other thing that a lot of us are trying to stick with, is not only explain what’s required, but why.
RS: Sure.
AS: So look at the inspector as a resource, not as an adversary.
RS: And something I just wanna share with any listeners, if you’re in a situation… I think what Andy offers is pretty unique. If you’re in a situation where you had a contractor install some siding and you’re going, “This is messed up, they couldn’t have done this right,” we get those calls at Structure Tech all the time, where I want you to look at the roof and make sure the contractor did it right. I want you to look at this, I want you to look at that, make sure it meets code and all this other stuff. And we just kind of go, “Eh, that’s not really what we do, but I guess maybe we can kinda sorta… ” That’s always our answer. But this is what Andy does for a living. This is his bread and butter. He loves this stuff. He’ll do these all day. So if you got a dispute, Andy knows the code like the back of his hand. He carries the code book around like his Bible, and he loves this stuff. Does that sound about right, Andy?
AS: It does. And it’s something that I’ve been, again, able to make a profession out of. And now we’ve been able to support a business with, I think, 10 different employees now. So it’s something that… It’s a definite need, as far as providing as much value as possible to the building permit process. And what we’re doing is obviously working out quite well because, inside of four years, we’ve got 12 municipalities that we’re working with, and a couple more that we’re looking at. Again, I’m rather biased in this, but I think we’re providing a good customer service experience with the building code permits that we’re issuing, as well as the education and the building code compliance. We’re able to be a lot more responsive than perhaps a municipal employee is able to just because of the confines of their working environment.
BO: So, Andy, does your work take you into the insurance claims world as well? And do you ever have to bring a report to an insurance company to make sure a contractor did the job the way they were supposed to?
AS: That’s a very timely question because, yes, that’s something we’re starting to get into now with these code compliance assessments. Again, the municipalities have a set amount of resources with their employees, and the amount of time in their day. They can’t adjust or fluctuate enough to provide answers to these questions. So what we’re doing is we’re providing consulting services to these instances. We’re even starting to work with public adjusters now. We’ve been down on some appraisals. So we can get a little bit deeper than the typical building inspector can when it comes to manufacturer’s installation criteria, because, remember, the manufacturer’s installation instructions are an extension of the code. So the code language itself is important, but it doesn’t tell, as Paul Harvey would say, the rest of the story. I’m kind of dating myself there.
BO: I was gonna say that’s a blast from the past.
AS: It is, isn’t it? So we’re able to look at…
TM: Someone explain that to me.
BO: Oh, Tessa, you’re such a young one. Oh my goodness.
TM: Do that later.
[laughter]
BO: Technically, Tessa’s a millennial.
AS: So that’s where we’re really starting to extend our businesses to, is this private consulting. So we’re working in… Boy, there’s a lot of metro cities we’re working in as well, even though they have their own designated building official, they have not engaged… Due to a limitation of resources, they’re not able to engage the insurance company or the contractor to find out really what’s the extent of the manufacturer’s installation criteria for a roof covering, for claddings. The big ticket lately is water-resistant barrier, Tyvek and Typar, and things like that. Now there’s spray-applied water-resistant barriers or liquid-applied water-resistant barriers. And when you’re working for a municipality that only has so many inspectors, and it takes them very long to respond to these needs, they can’t provide the assistance that’s needed. So we’re actually providing consulting services in the municipalities around the metro area that already have it designated.
BO: Do you have any authority to make somebody do something in terms of… When you’re in this insurance, this middle ground between a contractor and insurance company, a municipality? That’s question number one. And question number two, if you could just explain to the audience what a public adjuster is, that’d be great. I don’t want that to slip beyond us.
AS: Well, that’s a good point that perhaps we can touch on in a minute as well, but our job is not to enforce in any of these jurisdictions where we’re not the designated building official. Really, what we do is identify and summarize. We identify and summarize the various code provision. It’s left to the local building official to enforce.
BO: Gotcha. Okay. And if you’re contracted to that municipality, then you’re enforcing.
AS: That’s true. Then we will wear both of those hats.
BO: Okay. Okay. Wow, great conversation. I only have 47,000 more questions to ask you, but time does not allow. One thing I do want, Andy, is could you tell everybody your contact information, if they have any questions or if they’d like to engage you, engage your services, your website, phone number, all that good stuff.
AS: Certainly. Our website is rumrivercc.com, and my email addresses is Andy, A-N-D-Y, @rumrivercc.com. My cell number is on there, as is a little bit of a description as far as what we’re doing. Actually, on the website, I would encourage you to look at our informational handouts. There’s a whole host of handouts pertaining to plumbing, mechanical, building, energy code. What we’ve been able to do is take the very important pieces of the code and summarize it into handouts. And that can be very informative if you have general questions about those subjects. That’s a separate tab on the website. That’s rumrivercc.com.
BO: Wow, that’s kind of a leading supplier of compact intelligent information about your building product. I like that.
AS: Thank you.
RS: Awesome.
BO: Well, thank you very much, Andy. We appreciate you spending some time with us today. You’re a every-four-week guest, because I think there’s no amount of building questions we could burn through by the end of the year. So, anyway, we really appreciate you stopping by. On behalf of Reuben and Tessa, I’m Bill Oelrich. You’ve been listening to Structure Talk, a Structure Tech presentation, and we will catch you next time.