When California’s governor signed AB 1738, the state joined a short list of places that have written remote inspection into law. By July 1, 2027, every California city and county must offer homeowners and contractors a remote option for a defined set of residential projects, at no greater cost and with no greater delay than an in-person visit.
California is not alone, and it will not be the last. Florida and Texas already authorize remote inspections in state law, Maryland passed an energy package in 2026 that includes a remote inspection requirement tied to permit turnaround, and New York’s solar incentive program already requires virtual inspections as a follow-up step. Meanwhile, building departments across the country have built their own programs without waiting for a mandate.
So which states are next? No one can predict legislation with certainty, but the signals are visible. This article reviews where remote inspection law stands today, explains why momentum is building, and identifies the conditions and places most likely to produce the next wave. It also covers what contractors and building departments can do now, before a mandate arrives.
Remote inspection policy in the United States is a patchwork of three layers.
State statutes. According to the Assembly analysis of AB 1738, several states, including Texas and Florida, have authorized or required remote inspections in statute. California now has the most detailed mandate of any of them.
State program requirements. Some states attach remote inspections to programs rather than building codes. Canary Media reports that New York’s NY-Sun solar and storage subsidy program requires virtual inspections as a follow-up to on-site local inspections.
Local practice. This is the largest layer. Before AB 1738, 19 California jurisdictions already offered some form of remote inspection, from Los Angeles and San Diego to rural Placer County. A 2021 report found cities and counties in Arizona, California, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Virginia and Washington allowing virtual inspections to varying degrees.
The International Code Council has published best practices for remote inspections, and the National Fire Protection Association and HUD have issued remote inspection standards, according to SPUR. Even so, the approach is still used by a relatively small share of the more than 40,000 permitting jurisdictions in the country.
Florida moved first. Its 2021 amendments to the state’s building code statutes authorized state and local enforcement agencies to perform virtual inspections at their discretion. According to the National Law Review, the authorization is broad but does not apply to structural inspections on threshold buildings. The law also requires local agencies to accept inspection requests electronically, and it defines a virtual inspection as one that uses visual or electronic aids so an inspector does not have to be physically present, as described by Contractor.
Florida’s model is permissive. It gives departments the authority but not the obligation, and the scope of virtual inspection varies widely from one jurisdiction to the next. That flexibility helped adoption spread quickly, but it also left gaps. One construction law firm warned that statutory authority does not settle questions about liability and standards of care when a defect is later alleged.
Texas has state-level authorization, and the AB 1738 analysis notes that some local jurisdictions in Texas and Arizona have implemented programs allowing remote inspections for defined residential scopes of work.
Arizona shows how a local program can grow. Pima County began doing virtual inspections for residential air-conditioning installations more than a decade ago and expanded them over time. A solar inspection technician quoted by Canary Media describes sending photos and videos of the panel, disconnect, meter and conduit runs to the county and getting a pass or fail email soon after. The county’s deputy director said inspectors were once driving up to 150 miles a day and that virtual inspections saved vehicle and fuel costs and allowed more inspections.
The county’s former development services director told Canary Media that the program grew out of necessity after the 2008 real estate crash forced major staff cuts. She also offered advice relevant to any state weighing a mandate: involve local departments in the process so they support the change instead of resisting it.
Maryland is the clearest recent example of a state moving from local practice to statewide policy. The legislature passed the Maryland Utility RELIEF Act at the end of its 2026 session, and Maryland PIRG reports that Governor Moore signed it on May 12. The package includes automated solar permitting and inspection process improvements.
As reported by Canary Media before final passage, counties would be required to adopt online solar permitting by mid-2027, and counties that cannot meet five-day turnarounds by mid-2028 must offer a remote inspection option that provides an inspection within five business days of a request. Check the final text for the exact requirements.
Maryland’s approach differs from California’s. Instead of a flat mandate, it uses remote inspection as a remedy for slow departments. Maryland counties also pushed back. The Maryland Association of Counties warned lawmakers that a prescriptive state mandate could undermine local flexibility, strain budgets and compromise safety safeguards. That argument is likely to appear in every state that considers similar legislation.
New York shows a third path. Rather than changing building codes, the state requires virtual inspections within a subsidy program. This approach can move quickly because it does not require every local building department to change its rules at once, but it also creates uneven practice between program-funded projects and everything else. Other states with incentive programs could follow the same route.
Four forces are pushing more states toward remote inspection.
Cost savings. An Interstate Renewable Energy Council white paper, summarized by Canary Media, estimates that technology-enabled virtual inspections can reduce costs by more than $30,000 per inspector each year and allow roughly three times as many inspections per day.
Staffing shortages. Propmodo has reported a growing shortage of building code officials, and notes that remote inspection technology can also help with recruitment and retention. Departments that cannot hire enough inspectors need tools that let each inspector cover more ground.
Housing and electrification goals. California’s bill sponsors, Permit Power and SPUR, framed remote inspection as a way to remove friction from housing and clean energy projects. The same argument applies in any state trying to speed up solar, battery and heat pump installations while utility bills rise.
Proven results. Placer County, California estimates it eliminates about 3,900 driving miles a year with remote video inspections, and its chief building official says contractors who try the program tend to keep using it because they can pick the inspection time. Evidence like this makes legislative arguments easier.
Predicting the next state is partly guesswork, but several conditions make a state more likely to act: existing local programs, active permitting reform, a clean energy or housing agenda, and organized advocacy. Based on those signals, these are places to watch. This is an informed assessment, not a forecast.
Colorado, Washington, Massachusetts, Ohio, Virginia and Delaware. The 2021 survey found local virtual inspection programs in each of these states. Legislators can point to local experience when they write a statewide framework, and building departments already have some practice with the process. Virginia and Colorado also show up on lists of states with SolarAPP+ adopting communities, according to Energyscape, a sign that their departments are comfortable with digital permitting.
New Jersey and Connecticut. Both states have recently moved on automated solar permitting. Energyscape reports that New Jersey’s smart permitting law, signed in December 2025, requires a statewide platform, and that Connecticut passed its own bill in 2026 with a platform deadline of July 1, 2028. Digital permitting is a natural precursor to remote inspection, because the same systems store the photos and records. Verify the details before relying on them.
New York. With virtual inspections already required in its solar program, the step from program rule to broader policy is a small one.
Arizona, Texas and Florida. These states already have large numbers of local programs. The next move may be to tighten or expand what exists, such as converting discretionary authority into a must-offer list.
Permit Power told Canary Media that about a half dozen states advanced or considered solar and battery permitting reform bills in 2026, some of which would impose mandates and some of which would give state support to jurisdictions that adopt virtual inspection. Expect more of that activity in the 2027 sessions.
Not every bill will pass. Opponents tend to raise the same arguments.
Local control. Counties and cities do not like being told how to run their departments, as Maryland’s counties showed.
Safety and the camera frame. Building officials argue that a camera cannot show everything. Remote inspection laws answer this by letting inspectors require an in-person visit when they cannot verify compliance, and by excluding complex work such as foundations and framing.
Liability. Departments want to know whether remote inspections change their exposure. AB 1738 applies the same liabilities and immunities to remote and in-person inspections, a provision other states may copy.
Technology and budgets. Pima County’s former director noted that her department had to upgrade its permit management software to handle digital inputs, and that smaller agencies may not welcome the IT work. State support or grants could make the difference.
Fraud. Departments need confidence that a contractor is showing the right job site. Placer County uses live video only so it knows it is at the right location, and it bans contractors who misrepresent their work from its program.
New state laws will likely borrow from the models that already exist. A typical bill may include a list of must-offer project types, a rule that remote inspections cost no more and take no longer than in-person ones, authority for inspectors to require an in-person visit, audit and penalty provisions for misrepresentation, and periodic reporting on remote inspection counts and failure rates. California’s bill includes all of these. Maryland adds a turnaround standard. Florida contributes the basic authority and electronic request rules.
For states that want to move cautiously, the easiest first step may be solar, battery, water heater and HVAC work. These projects are repetitive, well documented and tied to energy policy goals, which is why they appear at the top of California’s must-offer list.
Waiting for a mandate is a missed opportunity. Departments and contractors in any state can start building the skills and records that remote inspection requires.
For building departments: Pilot remote inspection on a few high-volume permit types. Look for a tool that works without an app, supports low-connectivity situations and creates a clear record. Blitzz Inspect supports remote video inspection from any phone browser, with call recording and HD photo capture for the inspection record. Blitzz’s Accela integration lets departments launch inspections from permit records. Government teams can learn more on the government customers page.
For contractors: Build a documentation habit now. BlitzzCam field photo documentation stamps each photo with GPS location and timestamp and files it by job and phase, so you have verified pre-cover and final photos ready when an inspector asks. Contractors in construction and utilities and energy can see how these tools apply to their work.
For everyone: Learn from existing programs. Blitzz’s case studies and feature overview are a good place to start.
Remote building inspection is moving from pilot programs to public policy. Florida and Texas authorized it, California and Maryland have taken mandatory steps, New York uses program rules, and Arizona shows what local leadership can achieve. The next states are most likely to be those with existing local programs, active permitting reform and strong advocacy behind them.
Whether or not your state is next, the practical lesson is the same: the departments and contractors who prepare early will have the smoothest transition. To see how remote video inspection and BlitzzCam field photo documentation can support your program, schedule a demo with the Blitzz team.