It's not just about improving a property. For instance: Replacing the water heater, sewer line, water piping or some fixtures are all considered "permit required" work but none of those would ordinarily "improve" the property.

Much of what we plumbers do may improve someone's life style, provide more convenience or whatever but it would be considered a property value enhancement so if the city is trying to base permits upon property improvement they are barking up the wrong tree.

I say get rid of the city inspectors all together. No matter what you do to a hockey puck, you can't play basketball with it and that's how far off base our inspection system is.

The idea that a taxpayer funded inspection department can work is completely bassackwards from human nature. The inspectors are beholden to politics and politics ain't about doing right, it's about getting re-elected.

Here are a couple of ideas:

Option 1:
If contractors need a third party inspector, we should job it out to licensed and bonded inspection professionals who will have their hide on the line if they approve something that is sub standard.

The standard permit fees ought to double or triple, whatever it takes. Every inspection should cost what it needs to cost, just to make sure the costs of inspection are covered.

Option 2:
If a contractor is going to do business, he should have to put up a big, fat bond and assume personal liability for anything that's not up to code. Then, if he screws up, he gets whacked big time. If he gets caught working without the bond, it's jail time.

He won't need a plumbing license and can send out unlicensed guys to do his work if he wants to take the risk. That's up to him because it's his hiney on the line.