An act to amend Section 7110 of the Business and Professions Code, relating to contractors.
AB 2287 would amend Section 7110 of the Business and Professions Code, which is part of the Contractors State License Law, to add a new exemption from disciplinary action. Under current law, a contractor licensee can face discipline for willful or deliberate violations of building laws and certain other state and local laws, including safety, labor, insurance, permit, and related requirements. The bill would state that a licensee who uses technologies, tools, and equipment while performing construction work under the Contractors State License Law is not subject to a cause for disciplinary action against themselves.
As drafted, the measure appears to create a broad carve-out tied to the use of technologies, tools, and equipment in construction work, while leaving the existing list of disciplinary triggers in place for other conduct. The text does not define the scope of the protected technologies or explain whether the exemption applies only to certain kinds of equipment or to all use of tools and technology in the course of licensed work.
If enacted, AB 2287 would modify contractor licensing discipline standards in the Business and Professions Code by limiting when the Contractors State License Board may pursue disciplinary action under Section 7110. The practical effect would be to narrow enforcement authority over licensees in situations involving the use of technologies, tools, and equipment during construction work, potentially affecting contractors, subcontractors, and the Board’s disciplinary process. The bill does not appear to change licensing requirements, create a new program, or appropriate funds, but it would alter the statutory grounds for professional discipline.
Available context suggests the bill had little public process at the time provided: it was set for a first hearing in Assembly Business and Professions, but the hearing was canceled at the request of the author. There are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the materials provided, so there is no documented floor or committee sentiment beyond the bill being introduced and then paused before hearing. The absence of opposition or support in the record makes the overall sentiment indeterminate, though the author’s request to cancel the hearing suggests the measure was not advanced immediately.
The main point of contention is likely the breadth of the new disciplinary exemption. Because the bill would bar discipline for a licensee who engages in the use of technologies, tools, and equipment in construction work, stakeholders may question whether that language is too expansive or could unintentionally shield unsafe or unlawful conduct from professional discipline. Contractors and industry supporters may view the bill as reducing unnecessary regulatory exposure, while the Contractors State License Board, labor advocates, safety advocates, or local permitting interests could be concerned that it weakens enforcement of building, safety, labor, and permit laws. The text does not show any resolved compromise or narrowed definition.