Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Construction Bond Threshold topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate keeps $50,000 minimum performance bond threshold after amendment fails
Summary
The Senate considered HB219 on March 2, 2004, which raises minimum construction performance bond thresholds from $2,000 to $50,000. An amendment to reduce the threshold to $25,000 failed after debate about balancing contractor access and project protections; the Senate passed the bill largely as presented.
On March 2, 2004, the Utah Senate debated House Bill 219, which proposes raising the minimum required construction performance bond from $2,000 to $50,000 to better reflect modern project costs.
Sponsor Senator Wright argued $50,000 is an appropriate level that aligns bonding requirements with the scale of contemporary construction projects and avoids accidentally capturing very small, informal jobs: "I think $50,000 appropriate level. We know the cost of construction. $50,000 is not a very big construction project." He urged colleagues that a higher threshold better targets projects that should carry a bond.
Senator Jenkins moved to amend the bill by lowering the minimum to $25,000, contending a $50,000 floor could disproportionately burden smaller contractors and argued a mid-point would be fairer: "I think 25 is a is a good number." Jenkins highlighted market realities about premiums and availability.
Senators debated availability and premium differences for bonding levels, with proponents pointing to inflation and project size as reasons to keep the $50,000 threshold. The amendment to lower to $25,000 failed on the floor. The Senate then passed HB219 as presented with a roll-call of 24 aye, 1 nay, 4 absent; the bill was referred back to the House as amended.
Floor discussion also included technical fixes (changing references from 'duplex' to 'fourplex') and the sponsor noted the intent was to make the bond threshold meaningful for projects where bond protection is material to owners and contractors.
The bill's next step is further House consideration and any required updates to procurement and enforcement practice once enacted.
