Proposed city budget includes plan to license contractors

New revenue source for the city and fewer choices for the city residents. Less competition = higher prices

This idea, while sounding good, is just going to raise prices. It's like our requirement to have licensed plumbers, that cost us twice as much for plumbing work. It will also kill off the part time and small contractors.

Mike is right, this is just a new revenue scheme.

Next year you'll see an increase in the budget to pay for a $50,000 city employee to handle collection of the $25,000 (which like Mike said will probably be lower next year). As in the past with plumbers, I will hire who ever I want to do work on my house. I still believe in personal property rights.

You have got to be kidding me! This isn’t to protect citizens it’s just an attempt to increase revenue. Council might as well just raise taxes a little more because the contractors will pass this fee on to the residents anyway. This also takes options away from the residents. Next you will only be able to hire a City licensed landscaper to mow your lawn.

Town residents let’s not absorb their problems VOTE NO TO CONSOLIDATION!

Not only is this just a revenue increase born by the contractors in the area. This will open up new ways for people to get scammed by fly by night rip off artists. As pointed out this will force conrators to up their prices and will make a whole new level of beauracratic bs but it will leave homeowners and such hanging as if these con artists come in...screw up a job and leave then when they go to police or court they will be told, "well you hired an unlicensed contractor so you get what you pay for..." And what is the fee structure gonna be? Why would a painting contractor have to pay the same fee as a remodeling contractor, or a plumbing contractor and so on....... Is this even legal?

You protect citizens from uninsured contractors by requiring proof of insurance before the job starts. I'm with the rest of you, this is only about revenue. I mean, I get it, the city needs some cash; just be honest about it. Even the folks who just fell off the turnip truck know that charging license fees doesn't have anything to do with citizen protection.

John and Terry: I take offense to your rhetorical comments about plumbing contractors. I have allways run a fair and honest business. We do not charge "twice as much for plumbing work". It is true however, that we are fully insured and licensed. We do not try to compete with the "fly-by-night" that works out of the back of their pick-up truck, with no insurance, no license, and most of the time no idea what they're doing, and no permit or inspection.

I take pride in my business, and don't rip people off. It is the "fly-by-nights" that rip people off, not the ligitimate business man making an honest living.

However, I am against government sticking their nose where it dosn't belong. It's just another sorry excuse to suck more taxes out of its allready burdened people.

It all boils down to: If you want a 10 cent plumbing job, then hire a 10 cent plumber.

As long as it's called a fee and not a tax it must be OK.

Right?

who in the world would want to live in batavia, have to be nuts, high taxes and more fees ,good job City of Batavia , drive more people out and bueseness to , whats wrong with you people, you need to be voted out

Ricky,
You make a good point, but rates of non licensed plumbers outside the city are lower. If I wanted a 10 cent plumber, the State will not allow me to do it just because I live in the city.

On the other hand, I highly recommend Mr. Hale for good plumbing work. I'd hire him even if his rates are higher because he does first rate work and is worth the price.

The requirement to licence contractors is not going to help the cause of city/town consolidation. This is just the kind of thing the town residents have been concerned about.

Genesee Plumbing is the ONLY plumming contractor I use :)

The people running 14020 are going out of their minds! Even the Dems voted to keep the Bush tax CUTS!

THIS is just another TAX. Plain and Simple.

If the City needs revenue, they need to CUT SERVICES instead of feeing and taxing us to death.

Since I already ranted on the "taxes going up" article, I will stop now.

/end rant

OK....one more thing:

Always always ALWAYS, ask a perspective contractor for an Insurance Binder!!!!

Seems like whenever I get use to the idea of living in the "rust Belt" and thinking, "well its not that bad, this place has potential..." I get snapped back into reality.

Thank you John and Julie for your comments about my business. Your kind words and accolades are very much appreciated. Thank you again!

Ricky, please read my comment again. All I said was I have the right to hire who ever I want. I said nothing bad about licensed plumbers. If you want to pay for permission to do business then do it.
I wish you luck with your business. I will warn you to watch out for to many "helpful" regulations. MY last business (as well as most of that industry)no longer exists because of senseless regs.
Chris C., there's a big difference between want and need.

How much revenue could the fee possibly generate? Doesn't the city already require an an inspection AFTER the job is finished and doesn't the city require a building permit for the contracted job? Doesn't the city already reassess the property value and gain an increase in property taxes after home improvements are completed by a contractor?

I understand a the requirement for a license in any given area but that license usually is issued after completing an apprenticeship or some type of formal training. In my case, I'm licensed by the city of Rochester for 1st class stationary engineering and also have an R-4 refrigeration license. Those licenses required 4 seasons of night school and 4 years of on the job experience. They validate that I'm properly trained and that I passed tests proving that I knew what I was doing in a boiler room or chiller room.

With that being said, what does licensing contractors accomplish other than an extra fee on top of building permits that they already apply for? Bad contractors, plumbers and electricians weed them self out of jobs anyway. Word gets around, fast.

The city can now tell you that you must paint your house and then charge the guy who paints it a 125 dollars licensing fee to perform the work. I hope city council finds this as absurd as I do.

without figuring in adminstrative costs for collecting the fee, it would take 200 different contractors to generate $25000 in revenue. I am not a city resident so I usually don't comment on city related posts but this one is absurd.

After reading Doug's comment, I think he has a good point. What criterion is the City going to use to prove one's worthiness to receive a license for any particular trade? What are the requirments going to be for an apprenticeship and journeymen? Is the City going to make mandatory prerequisite experience and administer an exam for each trade? If not, how is this protecting the citizens.

I had to study and work a minimum of 8 years as an apprentice under a master plumber, as prerequisite, before I was even allowed to apply to take the examination! Is the City just going to hand out licenses when someone SAYS they're a contractor and SAYS they know what their doing?

It doesn't sound like they what to protect the citizens to me. It sounds like 10 pounds of crap in a 5 pound bag. The only thing the City wants to protect is their own wallet.

do you people hear yourselves. "its going to make prices go up for the consumer" if ra haitz pays 125 dollars for 12 months and they DO "pass the buck" itll cost each one of there clients what 9 10 cents more for a new roof? even if a contractor only does 10 jobsayear thats 10 more dollars you have to pay for the job versus taxes going even higher? it sounds to me like thoe left wing nuts you elected to office r finally starting to get the picture. what would your comments be if they didnt charge buisness ownersanything but raised all of your taxesby 10%?

Jonathan, price will go up because there will be fewer contractors to choose from. Contractors that do not do enough business in the city to bother paying for that license won't get one, thus limited the choices homeowners have for who they want to hire. It is simple supply and demand. Less supply and equal demand = higher prices.

Bigger contractors will pay the fee and pass it along to the customer.

I am more concerned with the single individual doing work. I know at least three guys that do repair and remodeling work on weekends and sometimes in the evenings, to make a little extra money. This is not what they need to stay in business.

The idea that this will protect me also is a bit weak. Why wasn't I protected last year, or before that? This is just a way to increase revenue. I'd rather they just prove they need the money and add it to the tax rate.

What about the contractor who not only deos business in the City of 14020, but also does work in Leroy/Attica/Oakfield etc, and those places started adding these fees (taxes) as well. Cause you know they are going to look at this as a way to create revenue as well..... NOW the contractor has to pay $xx to work in each place?? This is yet another business killer.

I could be wrong (too lazy/hungry to look it up), but when I lived in the State of Florida in the late 80's-early90'2 contractors had to take a STATE test (and then of course pay some rediculous fee) to be a G.C. in the State. So, the contractors were licensed by the State, not the Municipality.....Doesn't that make more sense?

and again people: ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS ask these guys for an insurance binder!!! That includes these jerks that want to "seal your driveway"!!

I', having an issue with a local painter right now who screwed up one of my houses.....He KNOWS who he is, and I'd better get a call TODAY (if you are reading this)

Oh man, I read this story incorrectly. For some reason I thought the licensing fee was just for contractors doing work for the City.

This is a real kick in the pants for small contractors.

Why is Batavia pushing for more cash only purchases? No one pays taxes on cash. Well, except me. I'm special.

Good point George. Create a new fee and collect less tax money.

I agree with Julie.
The state should be the ones to license these contractors.

Julie,
You are absolutely correct about making sure your contractor is FULLY insured. You should ALSO have your contractor make you and/or your companies "additionally insured" as it applies to the project, you need to protect yourself as well. If your contractor is fully insured, it does NOT cost any more money. That's all the contractor has to do is make one phone call to his/her insurance carrier, and it's done. They take care of all the paper work (we do it for any customer upon request). MAKE SURE you get the paper work.

Also make sure any sub-contrators that might be on the job, are also insured, and get their paper work as well.

Here's some more advice; make sure you get a legall "waiver of lein" from the contractor, any sub-contractors, vendors, and suppliers at all levels. If you don't; you leave yourself wide open for a lien against your property, if your contractor didn't pay their subs and/or their suppliers. Make sure you get the waivers BEFORE you pay, and each time you pay.

If not, next thing you know, you have legall issues up the wazoo, and could loose your property to foreclosure, all because of some piece of crap contractor. Believe me, it happens!

Rick,
You make a great point about getting the "waiver of lien". We both know the same guy who had that problem of the contractor not paying the supplier. Luckily, the contractor was arrested on another matter and latter made good on the money owed the supplier. But while waiting for that to happen, the supplier went after the customer for their money and made life miserable.