Legislative News 2012

Steve Kaplan, CSA Legal Counsel from Michelson, Kane, Royster & Barger, PC and CSA President Bill Flynn from Electrical Contractors, Inc. testifed in favor of SB 70, An Act Concerning Fairness In Certain Commercial Construction Contracts. The bill would require timely payment pursuant to certain commercial construction contracts.

In his testimony Bill Flynn said, "the Connecticut Subcontractors Association strongly supports Raised Bill No. 70. It addresses a critical problem in our construction industry, paying contractors and subcontractors for labor and materials provided to a project."

During his testimony Steve Kaplan said, "the proposed legislation would amend Conn. Gen. Stat. §42-158j for most private construction projects (excluding smaller residential) to provide much-need parameters for billing and payment of excessive change order work, and also to clarify escrow account provisions to ensure payment for subcontractor’s work."

Read SB 70

Read Bill Flynn's testimony

Read Steve Kaplans testimony

Legislative Update 2011

February 2011

Senate Bill 850 - AN ACT CONCERNING THE DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND PREQUALIFICATION AND EVALUATION OF CONTRACTORS.

This legislation would modify the contractor prequalification statutes for the Department of Administrative Services and Department of Transportation.  CSA is opposed to this legislation.  

Steve Kaplan, CSA Legal Counsel from Michelson, Kane, Royster & Barger, PC testified against the bill.  Steve said,  “Although well-intentioned, the effect of these amendments would be to impose unfair and draconian punishment on many responsible and qualified contractors or substantial subcontractors.” Read more of Steve’s testimony.

Legislative Update 2010

May 2010

Senate Bill 131, An Act Concerning Retainage Became Law on May 24, 2010. It is now Public Act No. 10-148

Senate Bill 131 was CSA’s priority legislation for 2010. The new law will limit retainage amounts in commercial construction contracts to five per cent. It brings the retainage level for private, commercial and industrial construction in Connecticut in line with retainage for public construction. The new law will help subcontractors get paid for completed work promptly.

CSA president Bill Flynn from Electrical Contractors Inc. and CSA legal counsel Steve Kaplan from Michelson, Kane, Royster & Barger, PC, testified in support of the legislation.  Click on the link below to read their testimony

Bill Flynn’s Testimony

Steve Kaplan’s Testimony

DAS Denial for Prequalification Bills Failed

Senate Bill 241, An Act Concerning The Department Of Administrative Services And Prequalification And Evaluation Of Contractors.

Senate Bill 241 would have allowed the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to deny a subcontractors prequalification certificate if they had received four or more unsatisfactory evaluations within a three-year period.  Currently DAS does not renew a prequalification certificate to disqualified contractors.

Senate Bill 133, An Act Concerning Apprenticeship to Journeymen and Contractor Ratios is now Law.

The new law took effect on May 10, 2010.

Senate Bill 133 will change skilled trade hiring practices and allow most contractors to hire workers at a ratio of one apprentice to three licensed journeymen. CSA supported this legislation spearheaded by Senator Thomas Colapietro (D-Bristol) and the Associated Builders and Contractors.  It represents a compromise between management and the unions that will help small business and give more opportunities to young people in the skilled trades.

Legislative Update 2009

A Message from CSA Legal Counsel, Michelson, Kane, Royster & Barger, P.C. (MKRB)

CSA achieved a legislative victory this past session with the passage of a new law, Public Act No. 09-146, pertaining to change orders.
Please note that effective July 1, 2009, Connecticut has the following new law governing payment requisitions and change orders on both public projects for which a payment bond is required, and on private commercial projects:

Each payment requisition submitted … shall include a statement showing the status of all pending construction change orders, other pending change directives and approved changes to the original contract or subcontract. Such statement shall identify the pending construction change orders and other pending change directives, and shall include the date such change orders and directives were initiated, the costs associated with their performance and a description of any work completed. As used in this section, “pending construction change order” or “other pending change directive” means an authorized directive for extra work that has been issued to a contractor or subcontractor.

The “statement” requirement applies to requisitions submitted by both general contractors and subcontractors. While this provision does not impose a penalty for failing to include the statement, someone might argue that the failure to include the “statement” constitutes a waiver in regard to pending change order or directive work. Therefore, if you are not already doing so, MKRB recommends that you include this statement with all of your requisitions, and take care to include all pending change order/directive work, as well as approved change orders.

Protecting the Subcontractor

In addition to Change Order Legislation, CSA also addressed other legislative issues this past session that is of importance and concern to CSA members. What follows is a quick update.

DAS Prequalification Program

CSA Legislative Committee members were successful in their effort to get a “technical fix” bill amended that could have eliminated the provision, which requires that subcontractors are pre-qualified to work on state-funded projects that cost more than $500,000.

False Claims Legislation

Working in cooperation with AGC, many CSA members weighed in on false claims bills this session by contacting their legislators to voice opposition to the flawed legislation. They argued that the bills could have a negative impact on subcontractors who enter into contracts that are funded in whole or in part by state funds. The legislation was problematic in several ways. The bill did not define false, there was no requirement to show an “intent to defraud”, terms like “claim” and “knowingly” were too broadly defined, and if passed, any contract dispute could easily be challenged as a false claim by state agencies.

UCONN Retainage Issue

The CSA Legislative Committee continues to find a way to address a UCONN retainage issue. Apparently UCONN plans to withhold 12% on the Gentry Completion Project.

CSA understands that the additional 2% is being held only until the affirmative action report is filed. Regardless of the reason this is of concern because state law only allows state agencies to withhold a maximum 10% for any reason.

Click on This Link to Find Your Legislator