Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Local Hiring topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Maryland committee hears bill to require state-funded contractors to prioritize Maryland workers
Summary
Supporters told the Health & Government Operations Committee that House Bill 957 would require state contractors on projects of $500,000 or more to prioritize Maryland residents for work hours and apprenticeship hours; opponents cited concerns over contractor pools, federal funding impacts and debarment penalties.
House Health and Government Operations Committee members heard testimony on House Bill 957, a bill proposing worker residency requirements and apprenticeship-hour targets for state-funded construction and infrastructure contracts. The sponsor’s representative said the bill would require contractors on state contracts of at least $500,000 to prioritize Maryland residents for a substantial share of work hours and apprenticeship hours, and to pay into a state apprenticeship training fund if they cannot meet the target.
Gabriel Tuckhorn, testifying for sponsor Delegate C.T. Wilson, said the bill is intended to “make sure contracted work done in the state for the state should be done by the state,” and described mechanisms that let contractors substitute contributions to a registered apprenticeship program instead of meeting the residency or apprenticeship thresholds. He also described penalties for noncompliance that would be deposited into the state apprenticeship training fund.
Opponents and neutral witnesses expressed practical concerns. Kevin O’Keefe of Independent Electrical Contractors Chesapeake and other contractor groups said the region’s cross-border workforce mobility (Virginia, D.C., Delaware, Pennsylvania) makes strict residency requirements difficult in practice and urged more flexibility. He also pointed to a proposed five-year debarment after two violations in a 10-year period as an unusually severe sanction. The Maryland Department of Transportation submitted a letter of information saying the requirement could narrow an already limited contractor pool and could affect federal funding for projects; the sponsor offered during questions to consider excluding MDOT projects if the department cannot comply.
Supporters included trade and apprenticeship groups. Sean Malone of the Associated Builders and Contractors and Ray Baker of the Baltimore-DC Building Trades testified the bill dovetails with apprenticeship expansion efforts and that increasing registered apprenticeships would develop Maryland’s capacity. Witnesses said similar approaches in other jurisdictions had increased apprenticeship participation and helped retain payroll dollars locally.
Committee members pressed witnesses about whether the state has data on the current share of Maryland workers on state projects, how the bill would affect small businesses, and whether the state should gather baseline workforce data first. Supporters noted portions of the administration’s budget and other bills would improve data transparency; sponsor representatives said the bill targets projects between about $500,000 and $5,000,000 as a place to start and that exceptions and percentage targets could be refined with stakeholder work groups.
No formal action or vote was recorded in the hearing. Committee members asked the sponsor to solicit further information from D.C.’s program administrators and to continue talks with transportation and contractor groups to narrow practical concerns.
