Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Owner Builder Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House approves substitute tightening owner‑builder rules, limits owner-built homes to one per year
Summary
The Utah House passed a first-substitute version of HB325 that narrows owner‑builder allowances, limiting owner-built homes to one per year (max three in five years) and removing an occupancy time limit; sponsors said the change protects consumers and closes licensing loopholes; the bill passed 68–4.
Get email alerts on the Owner Builder Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Utah House passed a first-substitute version of House Bill 325 on Feb. 22, 2001, restricting how many owner‑built homes an individual may construct and sell without a contractor’s license. Representative Chad Benyon presented the substitute, which allows one owner-built home per year with a maximum of three in five years and removes the earlier time‑occupancy requirement.
Supporters, including Representative Wei and Representative Parker, argued the substitute closes loopholes used by individuals acting as contractors without licensing, protects consumers and levels the playing field for licensed builders. Representative Wei said the change is targeted at people who repeatedly build and sell homes under an owner‑builder classification to avoid licensing and related obligations.
Opponents — including speakers who warned against limiting owners’ rights — said the existing statute already allowed owner builders certain protections and that the House should be cautious about restricting how many homes an individual can build. Representative Hansen questioned how many homes licensed contractors typically build in a year, and whether the limit would unduly impede small-scale builders.
After extended debate, a motion to substitute the bill passed and the House approved the first substitute on a roll call of 68 yes and 4 no. The bill will be sent to the Senate for further consideration.
The House debate centered on consumer protection, licensing fairness (workers’ compensation, insurance, lien recovery fund contributions), and whether the changes would unintentionally penalize genuine owner‑occupant builders. Sponsors said enforcement would continue to target those operating as contractors without licensure, not homeowners building a single house for personal occupancy.
The next procedural step is transmission to the Senate for consideration.
