Citizen Portal
Sign In

Panel advances apprenticeship contributions bill over industry objections, 5–3

Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee · February 5, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

SB77, which would remove an exclusion and require certain highway/utility contractors to contribute to an apprenticeship training fund, passed committee 5–3 after detailed debate over cost, where a 60¢ per hour contribution currently goes, and whether existing contractor training should be exempted if state‑registered.

The Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee voted 5–3 to recommend Senate Bill 77, a bill that would remove a longstanding exclusion and require contractors on street, highway, bridge, road, utility and maintenance public‑works contracts to contribute to the state apprenticeship/training fund.

Sponsor Senator Michael Padilla said the change would expand registered apprenticeship opportunities and capture contributions for workforce development that benefit project quality and long‑term labor capacity. Rosendo Najer, president of Carpenters Local 1319, told the committee the exclusion "doesn't make sense" and that taxpayers should benefit from project‑funded training.

Industry groups including highway contractors, the Asphalt Pavement Association and other trade groups opposed the bill in part because it would increase contractor costs. Mike Sandoval, speaking for highway contractors, said the fiscal impact report shows the highway industry would contribute more than other sectors and he objected to the change in funding structure.

A central point of committee debate was a 60¢ per hour prevailing‑wage training contribution: opponents said they already conduct in‑house training and objected to paying more, while supporters said contractors who already run registered programs can register with the state and not contribute, and that certified payroll reports necessary to verify current flows are incomplete.

After questions and explanations from witnesses and the sponsor, Senator Bergman moved a do‑pass motion and the committee recorded a 5–3 vote. Multiple senators asked for clearer payroll/certification data before subsequent finance or floor consideration.