As we mentioned last month, we are going to begin testing of Civic Platform Version 9.1 this month in our DEV environment.  This version is advertised to fix up to 15 cases that we have submitted to Accela based on feedback we receive from our end users (that’s you!).  This includes the “5 MB” error users get when attempting to email reports, like the Building Permit or Receipt.  It is also rumored to fix the intermittent “Contact your agency administrator” error when scheduling inspections, updating workflow, etc.  In addition,  we are working hand-in-hand with the Accela infrastructure team on a project that will be taking place behind the scenes to move our hosted environment off of Accela servers located in Salt Lake City, Utah, and onto a true cloud-hosted service called Microsoft Azure.  The software will still be maintained by Accela and configured by the State ePermitting Program, but the hardware will be hosted and maintained by Microsoft.  If testing of the cloud-hosted environment is successful, we will move each environment, including Production, to this new platform as we install 9.1.  The biggest benefit you will see is increased performance and speed.

Do you ever need quick help on how to process a Temp C of O, how to add fees to a permit that has already been paid, instructions on how to use and troubleshoot the Oregon Scheduling App, troubleshooting the CET report, adding/removing users, or any number of other questions?  You can visit the Kayako Knowledgebase for articles on all of these topics and MUCH more!  We maintain 140+ articles to help you work with the ePermitting System and it’s available here - Kayako Knowledgebase.

In the next Focus Training Chrissie Deibel will demonstrate and discuss Exception Payment Methods: Credit Memo, Fee Waiver, Write Off, Journal Entry, Billed, Refund Check and Fund Transfer.  The reports used to reconcile and track these payment methods will be reviewed: Refunds Issued, Revenue Exceptions, Records with Billed Fees and Funds Transfer.  This training will take place on Wednesday, July 19, 1:30 – 2:30 p.m.  Up to 12 participants can attend this class so please send an email to [email protected] and let her know how many from your office plan on attending the training by Monday, July 17.  We will schedule additional training dates if this class fills up.

Future training topics to watch for:  Using New Workflow Emails, State Surcharge Reports, Phased & Deferred Records, Conditions of Approval (Building), Fee Estimates.

We have heard from some agencies that occasionally the ePermitting staff reply comments on Kayako help desk tickets are not reaching you via email.  If you are experiencing this, we suggest working with your IT folks to make sure that Kayako emails aren’t getting stuck in your agency spam filter.  You can also always work with the ePermitting program directly to help resolve this.

The Oregon Inspection Scheduling App for iOS now includes the Public Works module.  Customers are able to search for their Public Works permits based on permit number, address, or license number and then schedule inspections.  We are continuing our work with CityGov Apps, our app developer, to add the Public Works module to the Android app.

​On June 26, 2017 City of La Grande went live as an OSM Full Services agency.  La Grande, who also provides services for Union County, previously participated as a Basic Services agency, issuing work authorizations online for their customers.  As an OSM Full Service agency, they now accept Structural applications online, along with issuing trade permits, and providing enhanced services to their customers.  La Grande is using the Building module and their inspectors jumped in with both feet by using the Inspector App to record inspection results.  Contractors who also work with Baker City/Baker County expressed their excitement that La Grande/Union County is now a Full Services agency so they can expect the same experience across multiple agencies in the NE area of the state.

​Most of our agencies are now using the New UI.  It became obvious that it was very cumbersome in the New UI to run a record-specific report from the Record List.  As a work-around, we updated OSM agencies so that all record-specific reports are available from the Record Summary page and will be generated against the correct permit.

​Kelly Marshall has been with epermitting for 4 years this Fall as a Project Manager working with new jurisdictions coming on to the Oregon Standard Model.  In support of the epermitting team and our agencies - she specializes in fees, advanced money/finance, application of building code/policy and building department business practice.  She has been in construction services for 12 years and came to the Division after 8 years with the City of Salem Permit Services management team.

Kelly has managed several new implementations including Counties of Jackson, Klamath, and Lake; Cities of Veneta, Newberg, Newport, and Coburg; our BCD satellite offices in Umatilla and Coos Counties along with BCD Salem and Special Projects – and recently brought our very first custom agency on to the Model, City of Springfield.  Springfield is our first agency to use all the available modules and first to go-live with our new Public Works module.  Kelly partnered with Deyette Kelly, also on our team, to build the Public Works tracking module.  Cities of Coos Bay and Pendleton are her next upcoming implementations.

With a 13-year-old teen athlete for a son, Kelly stays very busy outside of work and is a huge sports fan – local and professional.  She has a passion for music and concerts, and loves outdoor summer activities including camping and the beach.

1. Affordable Housing CET
We built a new feature in OSM to accommodate agencies who are charging for Affordable Housing CET fees.  Please submit an email to [email protected]v if your agency will implement this fee.

2. Resolved Global Search
We worked closely with Accela to resolve an issue with Global Search so now your search results should be accurate.

3. New OSM Inspector Route Sheet Report
The report will show the scheduled inspections for a specified time frame for a particular inspector (or inspectors) or all inspectors within an agency.  The report lists the inspections in route number order, if route numbers have been assigned.  If no route numbers have been assigned the order is by permit number then inspection.

We have considered adding fees incrementally but decided that overall it is better not to because:

• Fees on many records are interdependent and calculated off of other fees.  This makes it difficult to develop logic for adding fees incrementally.  For example, a record with a minimum fee is calculated by adding a balance to a fixture to meet the minimum ($25 fixture + $50 balance = $75 minimum).  If you were to add a fixture, you need to subtract part of the “balance fee” ($25 fixture + $25 fixture + $50 balance - $25 balance = $75 minimum).  That would make a very confusing receipt for the customer!
• If fees were adjusted incrementally, the customer would have fee items in different parts of the receipt, rather than grouped together.  With automatic voiding the original fee to credit and adding the adjusted fee, the customer sees the total fee amount in one instance.
• Individual fee items are used to count services/activities provided to the customer and for reports.  Incremental fee adjustments would make it appear that 2 plan reviews were performed because it could make the counts inaccurate.  For example, each plan review fee is counting a plan review performed – if you added fees incrementally you could have 2 or 3 plan reviews counted on the permit when only 1 was performed.
• The incremental adjustment approach does not save time or effort in processing payments. The incremental fees must still be invoiced to collect the additional balance.