Spokane7
49°
July 18, 2010 in City
City elevator program in doubt
Inspection backlog has officials considering a state takeover
City administrators are asking for help to salvage Spokane’s troubled elevator inspection program.
State regulators in recent years have questioned the effectiveness of the city’s inspections, documents show. Although the state says Spokane now is back on track, the program continues to suffer from a severe backlog.
To solve that backup, the Spokane City Council on Monday will consider a proposal to more than double the city’s inspection fees to help pay for a second inspector. City and state inspectors say the city has too many elevators for one person to inspect thoroughly each year.
But some City Council members question why the city should hold on to the program when it could simply turn inspections over to the state, which has lower rates than Spokane’s proposed fees.
“If our city cannot operate financially and viably at the rate the state charges, then we shouldn’t be in the business,” said City Councilman Bob Apple.
Building officials warn that there’s no guarantee that the state’s rates won’t soon increase too, especially because the state also has a backlog.
Under the proposal, the city would charge $175 for an annual inspection of a hydraulic elevator. Cable elevators would cost $350. That’s up from $85.
Inspections include up to two visits; additional visits would be billed at $22 each, up from $10.
Some council members argue that businesses are better served by maintaining local control over the program – so builders and managers can complete most of their permitting and inspection needs at one place.
Keeping the program “offers a better, more complete package of service,” said Councilman Jon Snyder.
In Washington, cities can maintain elevator inspections or turn them over to the state’s Department of Labor and Industries. Once the job is given to the state, the city can’t ask for the task back. Spokane and Seattle are the last cities operating their own elevator inspection programs.
Spokane’s elevator program, however, suffers from a severe backlog. State law says conveyances – elevators, escalators and dumbwaiters – should be inspected annually. But last year, the city only inspected 480 of 1,133 conveyances.
In a 2008 meeting between state and Spokane inspectors, the state expressed concerns with the quality of the city inspections and the backlog, according to documents received by The Spokesman-Review as part of a records request.
“Another inspection issue is that the inspections have not been performed to the national standard adopted by the state,” according to meeting notes made by Jack Day, the state’s chief elevator inspector. “I had the pleasure of reviewing many inspections from the recent past. It has been determined that grievous safety violations have occurred over the years and there was no indication the city had written corrections addressing these issues. The process the city has needs to be overhauled and placed into action.”
In an interview in May, Day said that since that 2008 meeting, the city has made strides to be more thorough.
“That is very encouraging to me,” Day said.
The city’s previous elevator inspector retired soon after he was injured while inspecting a downtown elevator in 2007. A new inspector recently left the job, and the city is currently inspecting elevators with a temporary employee.
City building leaders acknowledge previous inspections may not have met state standards and attribute the problems to being understaffed.
“I’ve got a good confidence that (the city is) inspecting to the state requirements,” said Building Director Joe Wizner.
City Council President Joe Shogan has said he’s not worried which government controls inspections.
“My foremost concern and obligation is to make sure that elevators stay safe,” Shogan said.
MAC faces angry crowd 
liarsinnews on July 18 at 7:05 a.m.
What the heck is the city of Spokane doing with a department that is not needed? Its time to turn the task over to the State!
bszottlinger on July 18 at 8:28 a.m.
I second!
steveeugster on July 18 at 8:41 p.m.
The city is not paying attention to details. But one must wonder about this story.
The city cannot get the elevator inspection done with one person, our very illusive mayor says. I find that hard to believe.
The city has one person doing “weights and measures” inspections and testing. That person is testing gas stations, diesel stations, and all other situations requiring accurate measurement of quantities delivered whether by volume or weight.
Surely there are far fewer elevators than there are liquid and weight delivery systems and other systems requiring accurate measurement.
Maybe there is something I do not know. Maybe … .
bszottlinger on July 19 at 8:05 a.m.
@Steven Eugster
You have a point however I would assume it takes considerably more time to inspect an elevator than it would to inspect a gas pump. The decision to turn it over to the state I would suggest would have to be made by calculating the long-term costs of city control including the extensive employee costs with the revenue generated from fees. I would also wonder what liability the city may have if an elevator that has gone un-inspected or wasn’t inspected to proper standards injures someone.
My position, without a cost and liability assessment, would be to let the state assume both.
Brad Szottlinger
MrNatural on July 19 at 10:12 a.m.
It seems as if this job has its ups and downs
Interestingly there are similar quandaries between state and local governments and usually in the realm of unfunded mandates in state law. Locally these inspection requirements do not get funded out of general funds and are paid by fee for service permits with occasional offset by the state…as those permit fees need to be raised locally there is great consternation and the first reaction is to send this back to the state to deal with because locals don’t want to afford it anymore. Despairingly the state can’t afford to provide adequate service inspections either and wish to delegate it back to the locals
bszottlinger on July 19 at 10:52 a.m.
@ Au natural
The story doesn’t indicate it is an unfunded mandate in fact only Seattle and Spokane are left in the state of Washington. Leading me to believe that both Spokane and Seattle thought they would be able to add some money to the city coffers with fees beyond the inspection costs.
Whether at the state or city level the fees are bound to increase with the cost of providing inspections, which includes increased personnel costs as time goes on. In the limited time I have been back here, I’ve noticed the city of Spokane has trouble making anything cost effective and perhaps it would be best for the state to take responsibility leaving the city officials with one less “service” for ruination.
Brad Szottlinger