Committee reviews bill to close enforcement gaps for landscape contractors, extend 3‑day cancellation to renters

Senate Bill 865, presented to the House Committee on Labor and Workplace Standards during a public hearing April 23, would amend Oregon’s landscape contractor law to close enforcement gaps and extend a three‑business‑day cancellation right for landscape contracts to renters.

Annie Bondamas, administrator for the Landscape Contractors Board, told the committee the bill would make four statutory changes. “The first change … fixes an important gap in our ability to enforce workers’ compensation coverage,” Bondamas said, describing situations in which specialized tasks performed under other agencies’ exceptions — irrigation backflow, low‑voltage lighting and wiring, ornamental water‑feature work, tree removal and pruning — had fallen outside the board’s definition of independent contractor and therefore outside the board’s enforcement reach.

Bondamas said the bill would amend the statutory definition so work performed under those exceptions is included when determining whether a licensee is an independent contractor, allowing the board to require covered licensees who have employees to maintain workers’ compensation coverage. She also said the bill would add an explicit exception allowing Construction Contractors Board (CCB) licensees to install or repair ornamental water features, which Bondamas described as an oversight in current law.

Bondamas described a separate consumer‑protection change tied to House Bill 2292 (2023). “This bill established a three business day right to cancel for landscape construction contracts,” she said, “however … this protection currently only applies to property owners and lessees and excludes renters.” Bondamas said the change would extend that cancellation right to individuals who contract with landscape professionals even when they do not own or lease the property.

Erin, the committee staff member who opened the hearing, summarized Senate Bill 865 as coming from the Senate with strong support and minimal fiscal impact. Chair Graber opened the public‑hearing period and thanked Bondamas for the explanation; Bondamas answered committee questions and offered to respond to follow‑up inquiries.

No formal action or vote on Senate Bill 865 was recorded at the April 23 hearing; the committee opened and then closed the public hearing and moved on to other items on the agenda.

The bill’s effective date stated in testimony was the 91st day after adjournment (commonly called a “sunny‑day” effective date). Fiscal staff described the measure as having minimal fiscal effect and no revenue impact.