In Gulf County, Florida, the government has come up with a creative new definition of “fairness”: if you don’t use their services, you still get to pay for them.
That’s the setup behind Gulf County’s latest fee scheme — a $500 “planning department review fee” charged to property owners and contractors who exercise their legal right to use a state-authorized private provider for construction plan review. And here’s the kicker: that $500 isn’t replacing anything. It’s on top of the standard permit fee — possibly with only a modest discount.
In other words: you still pay for services the County isn’t providing — and then some.
A letter sent last week by attorney Erica Augello to County Administrator Michael Hammond raises serious questions about the legality of the fee. She points to Section 553.791 of the Florida Statutes, which gives property owners the right to hire licensed private firms — known as private providers — to review their construction plans and perform inspections, bypassing the traditional public permitting process.
That statute isn’t vague. When a private provider is used, the law requires that permit fees be reduced to reflect the government’s reduced role. Yet Gulf County has gone in the opposite direction — charging more when they do less.
Whether that holds up under legal scrutiny remains to be seen, but the message to property owners is already clear: if you don’t want to use our people, we’ll make you pay anyway.
You don’t need a law degree to see the problem. State law is clear: if a private provider is used for plans reviews or building inspections, “the local jurisdiction must reduce the permit fee by the amount of cost savings realized.” Any fee charged by the jurisdiction for clerical and supervisory assistance must be tied directly to real, documented labor costs.
What’s not allowed? A catch-all, pre-cooked $500 fee, apparently invented from scratch.
Augello points out that Gulf County’s own ordinance cites this fee, but there’s no documentation of any actual administrative burden, cost basis, or justification. That makes it a violation not just of the statute’s letter, but its entire spirit: local governments can’t throw up extra hurdles or penalties to steer people back into the public permitting process.
In plain terms: this is red tape designed to punish anyone who dares to use a competitor.
Speaking of County Administrator Hammond, it appears he has placed Brad Bailey in the role of the county’s building official. But this raises a potentially significant question: does Bailey hold the required professional license?
According to the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Bailey is currently listed as “eligible for exam” — meaning he has not yet obtained a building code administrator’s license.
That status could raise compliance concerns under Florida Statute 468.603, which outlines strict licensing requirements for building officials and inspectors. The statute states:
“Each building code inspector must be licensed in the appropriate category… The building code inspector’s responsibilities must be performed under the direction of the building code administrator or building official without interference from any unlicensed person.”
It does not appear that Bailey’s current role aligns with those statutory requirements. If he is performing the duties of a licensed official without the credential, it is a matter that likely deserves scrutiny.
What happens next is unclear. Gulf County could rescind the fee and quietly move on. Or it could double down and face legal action. The letter makes it clear: if the County withholds or revokes any permits over failure to pay this “review” tax, it could end up on the losing end of a courtroom — and a hefty attorneys’ fee award.
But maybe the bigger question is this: Why are some Florida governments so determined to make “choice” a dirty word? The private provider statute exists to empower the private sector. Gulf County is using its ordinance book to strip that power back.
Red tape, meet the red flag.