Apprenticeship Council Frank Chiaramonte Confirmation Resolution of 2025
Summary
This resolution confirms the reappointment of Frank Chiaramonte to the District of Columbia Apprenticeship Council as a representative of an employer organization. His term would run until November 19, 2027. The measure is a standard confirmation resolution and does not create a new program or change apprenticeship policy; instead, it fills a council seat established under the District’s voluntary apprenticeship law.
The resolution also directs the Council to transmit a copy to the nominee and the Mayor’s Office and takes effect immediately upon adoption. The accompanying materials describe Chiaramonte as the president of Chiaramonte Construction Company, a Ward 8-based certified business enterprise with substantial construction experience in the District. The nomination package and legal sufficiency review indicate the appointment was reviewed by the Mayor’s office and found legally unobjectionable.
Impact
The bill affects District law only by confirming a specific member of the Apprenticeship Council created under D.C. Official Code § 32-1402, which governs voluntary apprenticeship in the District. It does not amend the underlying apprenticeship statute, but it ensures continued representation of employer organizations on the council, which helps maintain the body’s ability to advise on apprenticeship matters and workforce development.
Sentiment
The available record suggests a neutral-to-supportive sentiment. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes showing opposition, and the Mayor’s Office of General Counsel stated that the nomination resolutions were legally unobjectionable. The materials emphasize Chiaramonte’s business experience, community ties, and prior service, which typically supports a routine confirmation.
Contention
No explicit controversy appears in the provided materials. Because this is a confirmation resolution, any potential concern would likely center on whether the nominee appropriately represents employer interests on the Apprenticeship Council and whether the appointment reflects the council’s intended balance of stakeholders. However, the record provided does not show objections, dissent, or debate on those points.