Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the License Suspension topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

ALJ suspends several High Impact Sign & Design licenses pending financial documentation

State Contractors Board · May 20, 2026
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

An administrative law judge found High Impact Sign & Design, LLC in violation and ordered immediate suspension of several licenses, allowed for possible reinstatement if the firm supplies compliant financial documentation and pays fines, and scheduled a status check for Nov. 18, 2026.

High Impact Sign & Design, LLC appeared before the State Contractors Board on May 20, 2026, represented by manager Todd Lee Leany and a named trade representative, John Christ Hagemann. Board investigators introduced exhibits and the respondent provided sworn testimony.

The Administrative Law Judge found the respondent in violation of the presented allegations and ordered the immediate suspension of the licenses named in the ALJ order. As read in the hearing record: "License Nos. 47481A, 83161 and 90156 immediately suspended; Finds Respondent to be in violation of all allegations, with minimum fines to be assessed; Does NOT permanently ban Respondent, Todd Leany." The ALJ explicitly noted the ruling does not extend to Next Century Rebar and did not impose a permanent ban on the manager.

Reinstatement of the suspended licenses was conditioned on the submission of compliant financial documents demonstrating the ability to support the Unlimited monetary limit on the license and payment of the imposed fines. The ALJ scheduled a status check on November 18, 2026, to review compliance. The transcript contains an apparent inconsistency in license numbering: the record lists several license numbers at the start of the item and the ALJ's order cites a slightly different number (an apparent typographical discrepancy). That inconsistency is noted here and should be verified against Board records.