House committee weighs apprenticeship requirements for school construction; rural districts warn of risks

SALEM, Ore. — The House Committee on Rules on May 14 heard competing testimony on House Bill 3881, which would apply apprenticeship-utilization requirements to school districts that apply for school capital improvement matching grants and to public charter schools' qualifying public improvement projects.

Under the amendments described to the committee, the bill would apply apprenticeship goals to qualifying school construction solicitations entered into after Jan. 1, 2026. Proponents and labor witnesses told the committee the measure would create career pathways and help ensure a skilled workforce for upcoming construction demand.

"Registered apprenticeship programs over the last decade have expanded 62 percent," said Chris Hewitt of the Oregon Laborers, adding that apprenticeship participation provides a livable wage on day one and on-the-job training. Janney Turner, an apprenticeship coordinator and graduate of a laborers' apprenticeship program, said long, consistent projects such as school construction are especially important for retention: "Consistency, longevity, time to make mistakes and learn from them. That's what every apprentice needs."

Opponents from small and rural school districts, school boards and contractors said the proposal as written would disproportionately affect districts outside the I-5 corridor. Dandy Stevens, superintendent of Jervis School District and president of the Oregon Small Schools Association, told the committee her district relied on a state matching grant to pass a bond and that many local contractors "simply can't meet" the new apprenticeship requirements. "If these new rules go into effect in 2026, it adds uncertainty and likely more costs, jeopardizing our ability to deliver on the promise we made to voters," she said.

Other witnesses raised timing and implementation concerns. Several representatives and trade groups noted that a 2023 law (House Bill 2649) already applies apprenticeship utilization requirements to certain state-funded projects with the same percentage schedule, beginning at 12 percent and rising to 15 percent. Critics said school projects are numerous and often rely on local contractors that do not have ready access to BOLI-certified apprenticeship programs.

The dash-3 amendment described in committee narrows the bill's reach to school districts that apply for the state matching grant and adds a provision making apprenticeship goals aspirational for a subset of contracts as described in the amendment. The dash-2 and dash-3 texts the committee reviewed also remove certain project-labor-agreement exemptions and address rulemaking authority for state agencies to implement the policy.

School boards and associated general contractors urged more time for stakeholder negotiation and data analysis. "This bill is definitely not ready for prime time and just begs for an interim discussion," said Morgan Allen of COSA. Stacy Michaelson of the Oregon School Boards Association said many school bond projects rely on local taxpayer-backed bond dollars and that imposing state-level construction workforce mandates on locally funded projects can have an outsized effect on smaller, rural districts.

Committee members asked about data on apprenticeship availability outside the I-5 corridor. Proponents cited BOLI figures showing thousands of registered apprentices statewide and said more than half list ZIP codes outside the Portland metro area. Opponents and some members urged additional study of whether contractors in rural areas can meet the proposed thresholds and whether penalties for unmet goals would reduce the number of bidders.

The committee did not take a vote on HB 3881 on May 14. Sponsors, labor groups and school representatives signaled willingness to continue negotiating language and implementation details before the bill moves forward.