Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Contractor Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to convert contractor registration into a consumer‑protection license draws wide support
Summary
House Bill 239 would change construction-contractor registration into a licensed profession with discipline for fraud and misrepresentation, allowing DLI to suspend, revoke and debar bad actors from public contracts. Contractors, consumer advocates and DLI presented examples of serial fraud and urged passage.
Representative Morgan Teal told the Senate committee HB 239 would convert contractor registration into a license and create enforceable standards for fraud, misrepresentation and misappropriation of client funds. She said the change was prompted by repeated incidents of contractors taking deposits and leaving jobs unfinished.
Department counsel Quinlan O’Connor and multiple industry witnesses including the Montana Contractors Association and Montana State Fund supported the bill as a tool to stop serial bad actors and provide homeowners a regulatory avenue beyond civil suits. DLI counsel said the bill focuses on misconduct such as fraud and misrepresentation and specifically does not regulate workmanship.
Proponents described examples of large consumer losses and said licensing would allow DLI to impose fines, revoke licenses, issue cease-and-desist orders and debar a contractor from public work contracts. Several small-business and labor groups also testified in favor. Longtime industry participants urged the department will have more work to do enforcing the new rules, but emphasized that improved oversight would protect consumers and honest contractors.
Representatives from standards organizations and consumer witnesses recounted personal losses and urged the committee to adopt licensing as a way to stop recidivist offenders. Sponsor Morgan Teal closed by saying the bill gives “baby teeth to an originally toothless program” — authority to act where registration provided none.
The committee had technical questions about exceptions, how DLI will screen out disciplined out‑of‑state applicants and how penalties (including debarment from public contracts) interact with other remedies. The measure was left for further committee consideration.
