TRADES LICENSING STILL ISSUE; QUESTIONS STILL ABOUND AT BOARD MEETING

The Cape Girardeau City Council last October hoped it had ended a five-month debate on construction contractor regulations when it approved a scaled-down version of a trades licensing law.

Yet questions abound as to license testing requirements, how best to apply the new law, and to what extent regulations should be imposed on contractors.

The Board of Examiners, which was established as part of the licensing law, held its first meeting Thursday and tried to clarify a few of the concerns that have persisted throughout the licensing debate.

Five area contractors joined board members and city officials at the meeting.

Rick Murray, supervisor of the city's inspection services, reviewed with the board a list of common questions concerning the licensing law, which include:

Does a property owner acting as general contractor for work on his own home require a license?

Do employees of department stores or factories who perform construction or repair work at the business require a license?

What sort of testing and licensing requirements should be applied to various titles of plumbers no longer segregated from the

general category of plumbers? Examples include master, apprentice, and journeyman plumbers and drain layers.

What kind of testing oral, written, or practical should be applied, how often, and for what types of trades?

Is a licensed contractor required to provide on-the-job supervision at all times, only during inspections, or not at all?

The board refused to discuss the issues at length, and board member Tom Mogelnicki suggested that those contractors with questions should submit them in writing along with suggested answers and solutions.

"We're confused right now," he said. "We're probably going to be confused six months from now until we get some guidelines.

"Instead of going into it full blast, let's get real organized right from the start."

The board did approve a motion suggested by Roy Halbert that the city's current plumber and mechanical installer tests should be used for contractors wanting to apply for a license now, until new tests can be drafted.

"There are people out there now who want to be tested," he said. "We can't keep those guys waiting for three months. We need to come up with a test."

One item that's been a point of contention since the licensing law first was discussed last spring is whether contractors should have to carry insurance.

A liability insurance requirement was included in the first draft of the law, but was later dropped by the city council after a number contractors objected.

But Marshall Maxwell of Maxwell Service Co. said Thursday the lack of an insurance requirement undermines the whole purpose of licensing to protect the public against shoddy and unsafe construction.

Mogelnicki said the members of the board all supported the insurance requirement. "There's not a person on this board that doesn't feel exactly like you do," he said. "We feel fortunate to have even gotten the ordinance passed.

"But now we're at a starting point. I think you're going to be satisfied, but it's going to take some time."

Bill Borgfield of A-1 Mechanical Service asked the board if sheet metal workers who only do duct work will have to be licensed mechanical installers, which covers a wide range of skills. "They won't be able to answer a lot of the questions on the test," he added.

But Halbert said that as long as the sheet metal workers were under the supervision of a licensed mechanical installer, they wouldn't need to be licensed.

"The intent of the ordinance is that you were to have a qualified, licensed individual who would have responsibility for all the work," said board member Ralph Flori Sr.

In other business, the board named Mogelnicki chairman, Halbert vice chairman, and Flori secretary. The board also agreed to meet at 7 p.m. the first Wednesday of each month.