Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Manufacturing allies back transparency bill for state cement procurement
Summary
House Bill 5789 would require agencies to document and consult stakeholders before moving away from Michigan-produced cement for public projects; supporters said the policy protects jobs and supply chains while opponents (in submitted cards) cautioned about procurement flexibility.
Representative Cabot introduced House Bill 5789 to require state agencies to show their analysis if they intend to move away from Michigan-produced Type I/Type IL cement on public projects. The sponsor framed the bill as a transparency measure rather than a procurement mandate, saying agencies should "show their work" and consult stakeholders before shifting away from Michigan products.
Justin Kurth, manager of government and public affairs for AmRise, testified remotely in support, saying domestic cement manufacturing underpins critical infrastructure and that prioritizing Michiganders and American-made goods, when competitively priced, strengthens supply‑chain resilience and supports local jobs. "When taxpayers invest in infrastructure, those dollars should not only build roads and bridges—they should also strengthen their industrial base," Kurth said.
Opposition cards were filed by multiple state departments and agencies (including MDOT and DTMB), indicating concerns about requiring specific procurement preferences that could complicate competitive bidding. Committee members asked clarifying questions but took no final action at the hearing.
What happens next: The bill will move forward in committee consideration; stakeholders will likely negotiate language to balance transparency, procurement law, and competitiveness.
