John Lodman

My feedback

  1. 1 vote
    Vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    1 comment  ·  General Government  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    John Lodman commented  · 

    Idaho currently has a large staff devoted to reviewing and approving the financial qualifications of contractors throughout the state. The state requires licensing through the board for any contractor doing work for any public entity. The state also requires that any entity engaging a PW contractor receive a payment/performance bond. In order to secure the bond, the contractor must submit much of the same financial information to the bonding companies. I believe that the state should either eliminate its own financial review or eliminate the requirement for bonding. Bonding costs state entities around 2% of their construction budget- millions of dollars throughout the state. Has there ever been a study of whether bonding is worthwhile? How often are bonds really called on public works projects? I propose that in a state where we believe that the private sector can do it more efficiently, the state could eliminate its licensing effort and go with a policy that states "if you can bond the project, you can bid it".
    I would note that contractor licensing does not test knowledge of building means or methods, it is simply an evaluation of financial capacity.

    John Lodman shared this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base