2023-06-08 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

FRANK CALLAHAN - MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING TRADES UNIONS - HB 3012 - SB 2027 - Good morning, Chairman Collins, members of the committee, and I don't believe Chairman Cabral is on yet. Thanks for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Frank Callahan, I'm president of Massachusetts Building Trade Unions. There are 75,000 men295 and women who belong to building297 trade unions in Massachusetts who do the work that buildings like this and all across the Commonwealth. I'm here today to testify, as you noted, in support of House Bill 3012 and Senate Bill 2027 authorizing project labor agreements. This legislation simply establishes the procedures for the Commonwealth and its sub divisions to voluntarily enter into PLAs and the requirements to be included in324 a PLA with the appropriate labor organizations. Under the National Labor Relations Act, only building trades unions are allowed to negotiate pre hire agreements or in this case project labor agreements. This Bill is not a mandate for project labor agreements, it's simply an effort to correct an issue, there was a case a number of years ago in Malden, which we actually won the case, it was challenging saying that project labor agreements were inappropriate, for municipalities. But352 in the course354 of the decision, it's been misinterpreted depending on where you sit, that municipalities have to engage in a very onerous process as they extend my test mornings to channel.

We do believe that municipalities should engage in some type of feasibility and due diligence, of course, and what we did was we took language that's currently being used in Connecticut and New Jersey, which gives the municipalities whether it's a city council, mayor, or board of Selectman or whoever the local awarding authority is, the ability to engage in that, and then if they are threatened with a lawsuit, that stands. That's obviously their decision to make as local elected officials representing their communities, and that's all we're asking for here. Project labor agreements have been a great success, I'd be more than happy to answer any questions, and my colleagues here from various unions and local building trades councils can address that as well, but we think they are a great benefit. Again, this is more allowing cities and towns the right to utilize project labor agreements and attain the same benefits that private sector uses and enjoy all the time. The state has done a number of them over the years, I've been having negotiated dozens of them, and they really get the job done right and on time and bring a lot of other community benefits.

VINCENT COYLE - IRONWORKERS LOCAL 7 - HB 3012 - SB 2027 - Good morning, Chairman Cabral, Chairman Collins and members of the joint committee on state administration and regulatory oversight. My name is Vincent Coyle, business manager of the ironworker Local 7, representing 2674 Union ironworkers across Massachusetts. Ironworkers of local 7 would also like to be recorded in support of HB 3012 and SB 2027, an act authorizing project labor agreement. As you've heard already, this legislation purpose is to establish the procedures for public entities to voluntarily enter into a project labor agreement when it's in the best interest of that community. This legislation also sets the conditions to be included in the project labor agreements with appropriate labor organizations. It has been mentioned already, but I'd like to emphasize that this Bill is not a mandate for project labor agreement, each public entity will make its own determination if a project labor agreement is right for them.

This legislation establishes guidelines for them to determine if a particular project would benefit from the use of a project labor agreement and is423 in the best interest of their community. PLAs help raise the standards of all bidders on all contracts. Contractors who offer lower wages or do not train their workers will need to raise their standards to compete with other high wage, high quality companies. Businesses with well trained workers will be more likely to bid for and win these contracts. Well-trained, high-quality workers are more productive, completing projects well and on time. Thank you for your time. I ask you to vote for HB 3012, and SB 2027 favorably out of committee. Thank you for your time.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CHATON GREEN - GREATER BOSTON BUILDING TRADES UNION - HB 3012 - SB 2027 - Thank you, Chairman Collins, and members of the joint committee, also Chairman Cabral, who I don't know if he's on or not of the state administration and regulatory oversight. My name is Chaton Green, business agent for the Greater Boston Building Trade Unions. Greater Boston building trade unions would also like to be recorded in support of HB 3012 and SB 2027, an act authorizing project labor agreement. As you've heard already, the legislation's purpose is to establish the procedures for public entities to voluntarily enter into project labor agreement when it is in the interest of that community. This legislation also sets the conditions to be included in the project labor agreement634 with appropriate labor organizations. Greater Boston Building trades have been involved in some of the largest public and private projects utilizing project labor agreements in the commonwealth. We have built seven buildings at UMass Boston Campus, UMass Boston Campus is where I started my career, that being a PLA project, and also, I graduated built in pathways, this was a project that was instrumental in starting my career and also my registered apprenticeship.

Because of that PLA, we have been able to meet and exceed the DEI goals of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Many of you have heard this before, but it never gets old telling, Encore679 Boston Casino built under her PLA had the most hours worked by women on that project than any other construction project in the history of the United States. That wasn't by accident, and we are very proud of that accomplishment, those are the type of goals that we can accomplish with the project labor agreement. We ask you to support HB 3012 and SB 2027 favorably out of the committee so we can have more accomplishments like these. Thank you.

COLTON ANDREWS - PIONEER VALLEY BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL - HB 3012 - SB 2027 - Good morning to the committee. Thank you to chairman Cabral, Chairman Collins for allowing us to speak today. My720 name is Colton Andrews, I am722 the president of the Pioneer Valley Building Trade's Council and business manager for Labor's Union Local 596. On behalf of the Western Mass Building Trades Council and our membership of over 5000 hardworking men and women, we fully support this legislation and its life changing and career sustaining effects. For all the discussion and debate about PLAs, it boils down to one simple principle, public benefit. What do PLAs translate to? On time, under, or on budget, safe and qualified workforce, diverse hiring, apprenticeships, the list could go on and on, but time and time again, these agreements deliver with the people and businesses of the Commonwealth. For example, the most recent Public Sector PLA, a Holyoke veteran's home, which Frank and myself both negotiated, will serve as an economic catalyst for the region and provide a pathway to the middle class for 100 of tradespeople.

In addition to the standard goals of minority and women hiring, we expanded these goals to veteran and apprenticeship hiring as well. We stand firm and strongly believe that this legislation would expand these great opportunities to every municipality that chooses to utilize a project labor agreement. Giving our local communities the ability to enter into these agreements as they see fit, bring the decision making back on these important issues to the people that it will affect the most. You will hear the argument that this legislation would force a blanket PLA mandate on all public works, it is simply not the truth. This legislation gives the power back to the people. I thank you again for your time today, and I respectfully ask for your support in making this powerful and historical legislation become a reality.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP ELLIOTT - I just have perhaps a technical question. What is in the law as it exists that prevents communities from being able to implement or adopt PLAs because I can speak to a big project we have in Lowell, and we were told that MSBA does not allow PLAs, which was disappointing. Is that true? Can I get some clarification on that?

CALLAHAN - The MSBA does not prohibit project labor agreements nor does statute, it's reflected in the Malden decision which we won, which is a project legal agreement for illegal and that project was actually done by the nonunion contractor. By the way, I left out, nonunion contractors can bid and win, and they have bid in one on these projects. They don't have to become a union contractor; they can just operate as a under those conditions that project labor agreement is essentially a collective bargaining agreement for that specific project. and they can work however they want. We'd love to see them join our ranks, to be truthful, but that's up to them. But the decision in Malden has been interpreted that the cities have to conduct rather expensive studies on PLAs for each individual project. We're saying that running against as I noted in my commentary, I believe the cities in town should conductive feasibility, I think that's their responsibility967 and we've done that as well, but we don't think they should be the threat971 of that. The MSBA will not pay for it, I sit on one of the MSBA panels, they will not pay for it just like they won't pay for a lot of other things like swimming pools and so forth, that would have to come out of a separate item in the budget. It actually can't even come out of the municipality’s construction budget, there would have to be a separate item. So, you know, those studies are up of $100,000, and I know a lot of cities and towns are cash strapped.

ELLIOTT - Would this legislation include that expense as being eligible under?

CALLAHAN - No.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

GREG BEEMAN - ASSOCIATED BUILDERS AND CONTRACTORS IN MASSACHUSETTS - HB 3012 - SB 2027 - Good morning, Chairman Collins, Chairman Cabral, thank you for this opportunity. My name is Greg Beaman, and I'm with Associated Builders and1081 Contractors1081 in1081 Massachusetts and we represent nonunion or open shop contractors. We have 480 companies and about 25,000 men and women throughout the state. Yes, I am here to speak on this Bill to speak in opposition, and I'd like to just take a couple of seconds to explain what our concerns are. So, with regard to workforce, there's a fundamental difference in how the two sides of the industry operate the union sector, and the open shop sector and that's really where the PLA is significant and that's the basis of our concerns. So, in the union model, as I'm sure you all know pretty well, the unions maintain labor pools of their union members, and they provide those union workers1124 to their signatory contractors as they're needed. In the open shop sector where our contractors work, they don't have the1132 shared labor system, and they don't1134 use the similar labor pools. The model is company specific, which means each open shop and nonunion contractor hires and maintainers its own workforce who work for that company. So, the difference in this model is really key to the POA. Under the POA, there's one source for all the trade labor and that source is the construction unions.

So, under the PLA, all contract for open shop and Union get all of their trade workers from the unions. This model obviously works for the unions sector, but it doesn't work for the open shops sector where they employ their own workers. According to data from unionstaffs.com, for 2022, the workforce consisted of 83.8% of workers working in the open shop sector. There may be dispute about those numbers but I would submit that in any case, there's a significant number of workers that are working for open shop contractors. As we all work to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion, I believe we benefit from as many pathways to participation as possible and the POA really, as I said allows for just one pathway through the union system. Like, similarly, if we want to attract new talent, which we certainly need1215 to do, it helps us to provide additional entry points.

We look at the minority side which I know we're all working to try to increase participation, estimates are that about 90% of minority contracting companies are in the open shop sector. These firms are already finding public work challenging, adding the PLA and the impact that has on their workforce makes the challenges greater. I sincerely1242 tip1242 our hat to my colleagues who just spoke in the building trades, they're certainly doing good work, and they've done a lot of great things in public projects as they articulated. Their system is good, it certainly works for them, but I would submit a lot of open shop contractors have systems that also are good and work for them. Under the PLA, they have to use a different system with workers they just don't know and have not worked with previously, this makes working on a POA job for them really not feasible. It's similar as we use this analogy, it would be similar to if you have a pro sports team sending them into a playoff game with a new roster of players.

The players certainly may well be talented, probably are, but they've never worked for this team before, or ever played for this team before. So, in construction, the ability to deploy labor effectively is very important, so we would submit that that is a legitimate rationale for why open shop contractors do not generally bid on PLA projects. That scenario we submit is not ideal for the Commonwealth because if those contractors in the open shop world, they can't use their own workers, then choose not to bid, there's fewer bidding companies, fewer reduced competition. I would also just make a point that under existing law, there is prevailing wages are required on all1325 projects, whether it is a PLA or not, there's also apprenticeship requirements, licensing, and certification that's required. Right now, throughout the Commonwealth on scores of projects, union and open shop contractors work together with successful results, I believe this collaboration and healthy competition benefits the industry. We believe that we will create more opportunity with an approach that's as inclusive as possible, and just by design, a PLA has one source for labor. So, for these reasons, we oppose H 3012 and Senate 2027. Thank you for your consideration. I would just want to quickly add that on a different Bill, the American steel Bill, we just want to submit our testimony and support, we will provide written comments to that effect.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP CABRAL - The previous panel has indicated that nonunion jobs, right? And bid on jobs with a PLA. So what you are saying is that it's not doable because they can't bring in their own workers on that bid?

BEEMAN - Well, that's our belief, yes. I agree, they can bid so I don't mean to imply that they're not able to bid, they are certainly able to bid, but because they can't rely on their normal workforce that work for them day in and day out, that's the issue because most of them don't.

CABRAL - On occasion have there been open shop contractors that have?

BEEMAN - Yes, they have. But we talk to our members regularly and the vast majority for the labor, the workforce reason, choose not to bid.

CABRAL - Because they would have to use labor workers?

BEEMAN - Right. And it's not that they have objection to the idea of union workforce, they certainly know they have licenses and skills, but they haven't worked with them before, that's the issue. So, I guess like anything if you used to what you know and what you can rely on, that's the challenge for the nonunion contractors. Not taking away anything from the talent of the union workforce, but they're not regularly working for the nonunion contractors. So, they have their own workers who they know and whose capabilities they know, so when they want to deploy, what workers are going to put on particular projects, that's what they do based on what they know.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

SEN COLLINS - I think for me, as we consider this proposal in your testimony, the shortcomings on safety are always going to take primary and I think1518 that's one of the things that we see with PLAs is the high-quality training, the safety standards that we're not seeing across the board.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

ELLIOTT - I understand your point where your open shops have sort of employees that work together on a regular basis, but I would also submit given the labor shortage and the unpredictability of labor and whether they're able to deliver it makes that much more sense to me where there is a pool that you can rely on. So, I understand your point, but I also think where, again, they're given the unpredictability, and who knows if that end is in sight, having a PLA justifies to me that there's going to be that commitment, but there's also going to be the availability of labor to fulfill that requirement.

BEEMAN - We certainly appreciate that1584 point. I would just say that if there was some flexibility where all trade workers didn't have to come from the union labor pool, it would be a little bit of a different scenario but I understand your point, though, I understand what you're saying.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

SEN LOVELY - SB 2026 - HB 3108 - HB 3113 - Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for taking me out of order, I will be brief. I am here to testify on a Bill before our committee, Senate number 2026, House 3108, and House 3113, an act to promote1650 American manufacturing. Taxpayer funded school projects and other public projects have been able to save on average $15,000,000 per year by purchasing fabricated steel from foreign businesses for these public construction projects. However, the results of such savings have led to the loss of economic activity of more than $100,000,000 per year and significant damage to our local tax claim steel fabrication industry. Over a1677 five-year period, this amounts to $75,000,000 of savings, but a loss exceedingly more than $500,000,000 of economic activity in our economy. This1687 legislation would require municipalities to give preference to US Steel1691 Manufacturers and fabricators when buying steel iron and other materials for construction and renovation of buildings. Manufacturers from Canada and other countries can afford to underbid firms on public construction because of a favorable tax structure.

The outsourcing has ultimately discharged1708 domestic steel fabricators and bidding on public projects. So I heard from many people in1714 my district and really across our Commonwealth, in the steel fabricating and producing entities, and because most of our steel is coming from Canada who can underbid and undercut all of the bidding, all of that economic engine is going over our border and not staying here where it can benefit our economy. So, I filed this Bill on behalf of many of these constituents who came to me and said, we can't compete, we know it costs more here because our tax structure is different than Canada and other foreign countries,1749 and, of course, they can underbid us,1751 and they will, and, you know, it's going to go to the lowest bidder. But all of those dollars are pouring out of the Commonwealth, mostly into Canada, and it's creating quite an economic disability and disadvantage to our businesses that operate right here in our Commonwealth. I'm have happy to answer any questions and I would ask for a favorable consideration on the Bill. Thank you.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

TIM GENDRON - TIM'S FABRICATORS INC - HB 3108 - SB 2026 - Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee. I am here to speak in support of Senate Bill 2026 and House Bill 3108. My name is Tim Gendron, I am the owner operator of Tim's fabricators in Fitchburg, Mass, a business that my brothers and I started back in 1990, we incorporated in 1995 and we currently have 26 employees. We are a small to midsize fabricator, you're going to hear from several large fabricators today and it's important to realize that for every one of these large fabricators, there are 20 to 25 shops like me. There are small to midsize 15 to 30 employee businesses and to be quite honest with you, we do not compete, most of these shops my size does not compete with the Canadians of foreign competition on public jobs. But I do want you to realize that it negatively affects us much worse than some of the large fabricators. Most of those projects, these public projects are large projects, they're too large for us, they're beyond our capacity, beyond our manpower and most of these projects are 500, 600-ton projects, so these are jobs that we do not target.

The typical project that we target is right around between 50, 60, or 70 tons. So what happens is when the large fabricator is unable to compete and secure these large public projects, they have to step down into our playing field. So they go after these larger projects, but because they cannot secure them, they come down into our playing field and they gobble up 8 to 10 of our projects. There's no way for us as small to midsize fabricators to compete with the large fabricators They've invested millions of dollars in their facilities in a completely different business model, our business model is much different. So ultimately, their inability to secure these larger projects really handcuff the majority of our industry because the majority of our industry are companies just2027 like mine. The ability for you to pass hopefully, legislation that has some teeth that will allow the large American fabricators to secure these public jobs, keep all the reasons that were just discussed and you're going to hear more of them would allow and be a monumental impact on our industry as a whole. Even though the large fabricators are less than us, they need the ability to secure this work so that as an industry as a whole industry, we actually have a level playing field. If they gobble up 8 to 10 of those midsize projects, there's really nothing left for companies my size, we end up fighting over scraps, and it's like I said, it's very important that there's legislation that protects them with some teeth. My story is much different than theirs. I thank you for your time and I would be happy to answer whatever questions anybody might have.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

HOLLY - UNIDENTIFIED ORGANIZATION - HB 3108 - SB 2026 - Good morning, Chairman Collins, Chairman Cabral and members of the committee. My name is Holly [inaudible 00:35:42], I am the owner of [inaudible 00:35:44], a second-generation family-owned structural steel packaging company. Below negative agreement with New Hampshire, but2151 we are a Massachusetts Corporation and we employ Massachusetts residents along with the Windsor and Maine residents. Last year, New Hampshire can also feel similar to House Bill 3108 and Senate Bill 2026. These American Bills are critically important to the health of our industry, not just the construction industry, but our employees and our communities. Maintaining a strong domestic construction industry in terms of prosperity for our employees, their families, and your local communities. As we'll be outlined later in testimony, for every dollar spent on domestic construction, ensure strong wages and good benefits for our employees and their families. These employees and their families reinvest those construction dollars into the local communities through their purchasing power.

New Hampshire recognize the importance of supporting our local communities, keeping our tax dollars local, I ask Massachusetts to do the same. With rising interest rates and the looming session, and I've already seen jobs put on hold in Massachusetts. These conditions put jobs at risks, families at risks, and negatively impacts local communities. Apparently, there are five public schools of Massachusetts that are aware of, that are out preventative. These include the conference middle school, the David probably in high school, the diamond, regional vocational school, the Watertown High School, and the2247 Lawrence Leigh, K to 8 aid school. These five public jobs are funded by taxpayer money. Unfortunately, these schools do not have American attached to it. Looking at the general the list of the general contractors associated with these projects and knowing that they typically buy foreign steel, these schools will be built by Ford Fabricated Instructure of stealing.

At the expense of people who live in a community who work in this community and pay taxes, the public dollars generated through state and federal taxes that will pay for these schools will be sent out of the country. They wait for some taxes in a foreign country. With fewer and fewer construction jobs making to fruition and the looming recession, we need for text our taxpayers are agronomy and our communities. As an update, Justin said, I even wrote this I went back and checked on those schools, the Concord middle school and the David Party all have Canadian companies winning the bids. They have not been awarded yet, but they have the top several bids are in Canadian. Watertown high school already went to a Canadian fabricator. And just this last week, in New Hampshire, the buying American Bill proved to be successful. A local fabricator was up against Canadian competition with the New Hampshire, psychiatric hospital that's going to be built and despite not being the lowest bid, that2338 was on various taxpayer’s dollar went to a domestic fabricator. Buy American policies are a win for our community, and I urge this committee to support House Bill, 3108, and Senate Bill, 2026. Thank you for your time.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

JOHN DE VRIES - CENTRAL STEEL SUPPLY - SB 2026 - HB 3108 - I wanted to first thank Senator Joan Lovely and Representative Jeff Roy for supporting SB 2026 and HB 3108 and the joint committee here on state administration regulatory oversight for your time today. My name is John De Vries, and I'm President of Central Steel supply, which is located2392 85 Deane Street in Marlborough,2394 Mass, and we employ about 75 people. We've been in business2398 since 1947. Construction, as you all know, is a very cyclical business and when construction slows down like its happening right now, revenue is essential steel supply and my steel fabricator customers can dry up overnight. Private construction work has especially begun2413 to slow down. As Holly had mentioned, many private jobs being canceled, put on2417 hold due to higher interest rates killing the returns to those developers. But private works slowing down public constructions such as schools, town halls, police stations, etcetera, are projected to become a larger part of the whole construction pie in 2024 and beyond. Therefore, the allocation of this public work to2437 local companies is very important.

I am here to plead with you to stop sending Massachusetts tax dollars to Canadian steel companies who due to their unfair freight practices in Canada have been taking 95% of the structural steel work of public jobs in Massachusetts and surrounding states. Structural steel is the one part of the construction job that can basically done 100% off-site and that's why it's most vulnerable to foreign competition unlike electrical work, plumbing, or excavation. In fact, there are many companies in Canada that have been set up solely to fabricate steel primarily for sale in the New England market and Massachusetts. This is how they do it, this is a picture I trust myself,2480 of a truck going south on Route 93 in the Franconia Nacho area where I have ski house, and, this is a common thing. You see them go down in packs of like, 5 and 10 on actually Sunday afternoon, they drop their steel at the steel site, they disconnect the trailer, they go back with just a tractor alone because they're not only anything made in the United States back to Canada, and then they come back on Wednesday morning or Tuesday morning, and then they have to wait to be unloaded because they have a new load of steel, and they take the trail that they left on Sunday night, they put it on top of the other trailer, and they go north of two trailers on the back of the truck.

So, basically, we're shopping nothing north to Canada, and all the steel is coming south. You can see the same picture unfold on 93, and also south on 95, coming from the Atlantic Province of Canada. Therefore, Massachusetts structure of the steel fabricators need you to help support the Bills that2533 we talked about, to help level the playing field and help to survive. I've been through two recessions myself since I've been in the business, and this is the time we tend to lose a lot of our steel fabricators, it's very tough. They're all family-owned businesses that pay competitive wages and are part of the backbone of economy. I was going to read a whole list, and I got about 20 names of different companies that went bankrupt between 1990 and 2020, but it's just too long to go through.

Some of the names2563 are American architectural in East Boston, Stern Steel Structures, the Structural division in Hyde Park, they had 751002569 employees themselves, Southeastern Metals, 75 employees in Rockland, Brighton Wilson Cole, 50 employees in Boston, closed in 2015, Tuckerman Welding, 100 employees in East Boston close 2017. Cape and Island Steel,2584 a big employer of the Cape, 100 employees, they lost them in 2000. Metro West Steel, 100 employees at Braintree Mass, close to 2010. This is not a complete list and the dates of closure number of their employees is approximate, but I visited them while I knew them to be good people just trying to make an honest living. But the truth is that foreign fabricated steel from Canada was definitely a direct cause to their bankruptcy or closure. Please, I beg you to do the right thing and support Bill SB 2026 and House Bill 3108, and move it successfully out of committee. Thank you very much.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

MAX PUCHTEL - AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION - HB 3108 - SB 2026 - Good morning. Thank you to the Chairs and members of the committee for the opportunity to testify today in support of House Bill 3108 and Senate Bill 2026, act promote American manufacturing. My name is Max Puchtel, I am the director of government relations and sustainability for the American Institute of Steel Construction. We are a nonpartisan, not for profit technical institute, and trade association that has been a leading advocate and trusted resource for the American Structural Steel Industry since 1921. AISC represents nearly 1000 domestic structural steel fabricators, 16 of which are located within the state of Massachusetts, who directly employ nearly 550 of your state's residence. This Bill, an act to promote American manufacturing is a common-sense proposal in line with the successes of numerous other states and municipalities to invest public dollars back to the tax paying public. Buy American policies create good paying jobs here at home expand the tax base and will improve the quality of life for Massachusetts residents. However, in the current absence of a policy in Massachusetts, damage has been done. Over the last decade, we've seen our fabricator membership losses in the New England states occur 20% more frequently than the national average.

This is caused by unfair competition from across our borders that materially harm Massachusetts workers. The public wants to buy American policies. In a 2021 Reuters poll, nearly 2/3 of Americans want their government to buy goods made in America. Government spending should not promote raises to the bottom on pricing, rather, public policies should be deliberate in raising up and supporting those tax paying constituents, improving their quality of life, and expanding the tax space in a self-reinforcing cycle of American prosperity. Further, you may not think that environmentalism has anything to do with buy American policies but when it comes to steel, they are closely intertwined. Domestically produced steel has the lowest embodied carbon intensity per ton among the seven largest steel producing countries in the world. Most notably, steel from China can contain nearly three times the carbon footprint of American Steel. In December of last year, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts released a comprehensive and aggressive plan to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Choosing American steel and American manufacturing by passing this legislation will help achieve those carbon emission reduction goals by reducing upstream emissions of construction materials. On behalf of the American Institute of Steel Construction and the Massachusetts Steel Fabrication Community, I urge you to support this important piece of legislation. Thank you.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

BRIAN LOMBARDOZZI - ALLIANCE AMERICAN MANUFACTURING - HB 3108 - SB 2026 - Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you guys taking the time to consider these Bills today, and thank you for having me. On behalf of the Alliance American Manufacturing, I urge you to support both H 3108 by representative Roy and S 2026 by Senator Lovely, an act to promote manufacturing. To tell you a little bit about the Alliance for American Manufacturing, we are a labor management partnership between the United Steel Workers' unions and some of America's leading manufacturing companies pertinent to this conversation. We represent a lot of folks in the supply chain for steel, Cleveland Cliffs, and United States Steel are our two largest steel members, which produce2866 a lot of this steel that are the inputs that all of the fabricators that will be talking here today make. We're talking about mining operations, in Minnesota on the iron range all the way through to, you know, melting, pouring, and making slabs and billets that basically go into the steel fabrication process.

On a personal note, you know, while I have called Washington DC home for the last few years, I was born and bred in Worcester, Massachusetts, manufacturing was always something very important to my family. Worcester Wire Works was the employer of my great grandparents and2904 my grandparents, like,2906 my parents grew up in the main south of 3 Dockers2908 that was known as factory housing. During my lifetime as a child born in the mid-70s, I watched before we had NAFTA and before we saw the outsourcing to Mexico, I saw a lot of great manufacturing jobs leave the state of Massachusetts to head south, you know, looking for lower cost on things. I'd like to echo some of the things that Max said about, you know, the race at the bottom of low cost and looking to make sure that we are reinvesting as many dollars in our community as possible. I'm going to highlight three things I want you to leave you guys with today about this topic of domestic procurement for iron and steel.

The first thing you guys should all be aware of is that Massachusetts state agencies are2948 accustomed to applying these domestic preferences commonly known as Buy America preferences. They've been on the books for the federal government since the 1930s, were expanded to grants from the Department of Transportation in the 1980s, and they are well understood by the federal government, many state governments, and contracting officers and bidders2970 on public projects. So, Massachusetts is2972 already doing this when you're spending federal dollars, this legislation today is to say, you should follow those good practices when you are investing state taxpayer dollars in projects. I have worked with our industry partners for the second point here, United Steelworkers and well as through manufacturers, label environmental communities in several states over the past decade. to pass similar Bills like what's being discussed today. As Holly mentioned, we worked with them last year in New Hampshire, also worked in New York, Texas New Jersey. Just this week testified on a Bill in Oregon that's looking to pass3008 the Oregon House, and we also got a Bill3010 through the Florida Senate this year as well, before the Florida House did not have calendar time to get something through.

But this is something other states are looking at, and they're looking to expand and joint states that already had these things on the books for decades like Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia as well as others. So, all of those states are doing similar things to Massachusetts and as you guys are probably painfully aware, as some of our federal policies turn into gridlock, states really need to be making some of decisions on their own, and we would like to see this practice happen in Massachusetts when you guys are spending your local tax dollars. The main reason I say that is Massachusetts should use their purchasing power to compliment your public policy objectives. You know, unlike foreign competitors in China, India, Russia, US manufacturers are heavily regulated and do not rely on subsidies from their government to make them more competitive.

Massachusetts procurement policy should not be divorced public policies, taxpayer dollars should not reward companies that have moved their operation, investment dollars, and jobs away to foreign countries that lack or completely disregard reasonable environmental and workplace safety regulations. You also need to consider this when you're looking into the lowest cost on a bid because3091 what many of the folks that you're seeing testify in front of you in person today,3095 you know, provide their workers with great health care and benefit plans. In countries like Canada, those are3102 things that the government picks up as well, so there's an added cost burden on the employers3106 that have to get factored into those costs. So, this is something that we're looking to try to level the playing field for US manufacturers and without the sensible changes enacted into law of Massachusetts is going to continue to send a lot of Bay Staters hard earned tax dollars to foreign firms. We've got American workers right in Massachusetts and throughout New England that can do the work. You know, we're anxiously waiting, helping you support these common-sense necessary fixes to the existing state law. Please vote in favor of both S 2026 and 3108, and please tell these manufacturers and workers that you support their jobs, their businesses, and their communities. Thank you, and happy to answer any questions.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

REP TYLER - So I just have a question about Lehigh School. This has actually happened in my city but also on my district, I know that I've been hearing just to keep the tax payer, both tax dollar and local businesses but in terms of money, what would it be the reason for Lawrence go to aid internationally if you want to call it that way company instead of a local fabricator?

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

STEVE CAPUANO - REARDEN STEEL FABRICATION - HB 3108 - SB 2026 - Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Vice chairs. Thank you very much, it's an honor to be here. My name is Steven Capuano, I'm president of Capuano, I'm also president of the steel fabricators of New England. Thank you for allowing me to testify today and special thanks to Senator Joan Lovely and Representative Jeff Roy for sponsoring this Bills, S 2026 and H 3108. Capuano Corporation was founded in 1956 by my father, Charles Capuano, and he worked out of the basement and backyard of his house and went to Mass before moving to Everett in the 1960s and then up to Raleigh in 2002. Over the past 67 years, my brothers and I, we joined the company and experienced many economic cycles. Currently, as we head into what appears to be another recession, Capuano and I am proudly employee 75 people. As far as the steel fabricators of New England, that's an organization of 120 members comprised of steel fabricators and related support industries.

Our members employ 40003307 steel fabricators and countless numbers of upstream and downstream professionals and suppliers. Currently in Massachusetts, there are 25 fabrication shops that are members located here in Mass, plus another 75 nonmember shops of all sizes from 4 to 6 people up to 75. When you start adding up these numbers, there's over 1000 workers participating and servicing the Massachusetts Steel Construction Industry, who are, in turn, supporting thousands of families. We're here today testifying in person, remotely and through submitted testimony which I've submitted mine as well about an archaic public procurement policy that is plagued the domestic steel fabrication industry for years, a policy that allows the award to the lowest bidder, not always the most economical, are environmentally responsible bidder. Our problem is and you've heard prior testimony, we lose over 95% of the public construction projects to foreign companies because we face unfair competitions due to currency exchanges and generous subsidies puppet by their governments.

They don't work under the same rules we have to abide by here in the states, additionally, they're not paying taxes here or complying with local state and federal laws. Because of factors like these, foreign competition has3392 been allowed to overrun our steel construction industry and basically wipe out our opportunity to work on any public construction projects, these factors all contribute to their economies. They benefit their communities, promoting growth and investment into their factories, but not ours. We simply can't compete, and therefore, we can no longer justify the bid expense to bid on most public construction projects. What makes matters even worse is this is all happening with our own tax laws that are collected to fund the building of these construction projects. On one hand, you may be hearing my testimony but on the other hand, you may be saying to yourself, it's really not3437 a bad deal to save some money and buy steel from a foreign country at a3441 cheaper value, but you need to look at this a different way.

Although at a3445 discount rate, the funds spent on foreign fabricated steel, they simply evaporating from our economy and our communities. The state of spending tax dollars at losing money by allowing this practice, there is no3457 return on investment, there are no new jobs produced or existing ones preserved, there is no additional local economic development spurred by spending, there are no revenues generated to drive the economic multiplier, which Holly was talking about, which is currently at a multiple of 1.5 times. So that means for every $10,000,000 that a shop like mine does, 15,000,000 resonates to a local and regional economy. So, we're talking a lot of work and a lot of money that's just evaporating from our borders. Our tax dollars, think about this, our tax dollars, which were assessed and pay for by our hardworking people and companies here in this country just evaporate, their tax dollars are actually working against us, they're funding our own demise.

You know, these tax laws are ours, they're not theirs, but we're not benefiting from them, they are, and they don't pay for them. The state is investing tax dollars and losing money, something is fundamentally wrong with this type of spending policy, it needs to be corrected. I would like to offer this with consideration. According to a recent Mass school building authority project report, published on May 11th solely for schools, K-12, there is $14,000,000,000 worth3539 of work on the books, okay? That is currently in process. Please note, this does not3545 include state colleges, universities, public buildings, fire stations, library, city and town halls, etcetera, court houses, public works. K- 12, $14,000,000,000, included within that report of 14,000,000,000 is $832,000,000 which is a line item for superstructure, super structure is the structural steel that we're arguing about here today. 95% of that $832,000,000 has gone or is going to foreign fabricators. So,3580 95% of 832 is3582 $790,000,000 is going to evaporate from our economy.3586

This is tax money, again, it's collected here from our workers, our company, tax money that is paid out, and then tax money that simply evaporates from our economy. This is not a good deal for Massachusetts by any stretch of imagination, the alternative to this type of policy in spending is, take that $790,000,000 with the work, have it fabricated locally and domestically, invigorate the economic multiplier of 1.5 times, alright, which equates to$1,200,000,000 with the revenue circulating back into the state. Domestic revenue that stays here benefits our economy, our community, creates jobs, encourages investment and growth into our industries, and ultimately creates additional tax revenues. This all starts from responsible spending and responsibly spending the initial tax dollars that we used to fund the projects in the first place. It's worth noting that3651 neighboring foreign nations are promoting the same exact policy that we're here in front of you talking about today.

They're promoting by domestic within their own economies, on their public structures, on their infrastructure, so they're arguing for the same thing we're arguing for. Instead of what appears to be an upfront savings from buying foreign fabricated steel to discount, we should reinvest back into our own economies, our own communities, and every time that money generates, the cycle just3685 keeps going around and around. It's easy to see the benefits by keeping that work local, our tax dollars are working for our economy, it's a better deal for Massachusetts. It's worth to mention that 20 other states have similar buy American laws, including one recently, as mentioned, New Hampshire. This is something worth listening to,3709 in addition to the economic impacts provided, there is something even better, the carbon footprint of our fabricated steel, from source to site will contribute substantially to sustainability and climate goals. Domestic steel, whether it's mined or recycled here in the USA is the cleanest in the world.

Neighboring foreign fabricators import most of their raw structural shapes globally from non-climate friendly sources, they produce higher carbon emissions because they do not adhere to the strict EPA rules and regulations that we do here in the US who then ship their products across the oceans, adding additional unnecessary carbon emissions to our climate. Additionally, transportation to job sites from neighboring foreign fabricators as John just showed you right there, add even more carbon footprint to their fabricated products due to the extra mileage throughout the jobs within the Commonwealth here, and that's at a 6:1 ratio. We3783 sampled 68 projects that were produced by foreign fabricators, we compared the foreign fabricator's location to that of a local fabricator to see what the increase in the carbon emissions were for total round trips and based upon the information that was available to us, there would be 3409 round trip loads although 68 projects with a performing fabricator producing 1,148,675 kilograms of carbon.

As opposed to a local fabricator producing 139,000 kilograms of carbon for the same number of loads. It's a 630% increase by shipping that steel from foreign nations, in this case, it happens to be Canada. So, this doesn't fit with responsible climate goals, and if the work doesn't go with a local fabricator, again, it's plain to see it would be a better deal for Massachusetts to keep this work local. So, give a consideration to all3853 the testimony we submitted here, written, verbal, and oral. Buying domestic3859 source to site is a better deal, it's better for the environment, better for our economy, and a better deal for3867 Massachusetts. I want to thank you for3869 your time, and I'm available for any questions.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CABRAL - I forgot which one talked about the tax advantages that, let's say, Canadian companies would have versus local companies in Massachusetts or otherwise. I wanted to explore that a little bit with you3914 if you could give us some information to the committee about being competitive, being able to compete with outside of the country in this case, primarily Canadian, that seems to be the ones that you have the most issue with. Since we are in the mode of making Massachusetts more competitive, including the Governor submitted a proposal of tax relief package, which doesn't seem to help the situation. I think if we're going to look at the tax structure, to make us more competitive, what sort of tax policy we need or would need to include on the books or to be part of the proposal that the Governor submitted to us or amend that proposal that would benefit your manufacturing companies versus outside companies or foreign companies. There are different ways of approaching this.

Obviously, one is either mandating, like, what this legislation would do, the other one that caught my attention was the tax structure. It seems that the Canadian tax structure we all know probably why sort of favors their companies, and they benefit from that. So that's one of the reasons why they probably are more competitive or cheaper if you will than most American companies. Have you or would you have the ability to provide to the committee in terms of a tax policy that4012 could assist in making you more competitive, will it say, Canadian Steel? I would like to see if there's a possibility if you have anybody on your team or the association or the alliance would be able to provide that kind of4030 tax analysis or tax structure analysis for the committee. I4036 mean, I recall many moons ago, if you look at the tax laws in Massachusetts, in particular, around sales tax, for example, there's more exemptions than anything else you can imagine, right? And I remember some years back, one of those exemptions, and I believe those exemption is still in the books, is aircraft that might need to4061 be repaired at Logan, right?

The parts that get shipped in are not subject to the sales tax. So,4070 the idea is the incentive that they repair, so by repairing the aircrafts in Boston at Logan, he'll provide jobs, he will provide other multipliers that you have mentioned, I'm not sure if they could move the aircraft if they need to be repaired, so I'm not sure of that argument but that was the argument that was done. Actually, when I first Chaired this committee many moons ago, some of those issues came up, and the idea was, okay, how can we re structure some of the exemptions that might exist, or are there any new exemptions that we should take in the consideration and add to the books? Because if you take all the exemptions, mind the food exemption, if you take all the exemptions if you were to eliminate those exemptions from the stacks, the state would collect roughly an additional $4,000,000,000 in revenue. So, that's where I'm going; is there any tax structure or tax policy that we have right now if it was changed or modified that would have helped make you more competitive?

CAPUANO - I think you may like my answer, we're not here asking for any tax incentives without asking for any change to tax policy because the public projects themselves are tax exempt, okay? What we're asking is to level the playing field with our foreign competition, who has an exchange rate at any given day of $1.30, $1.35 $1.37, so they've got an advantage because of the exchange rate. We're just asking4179 the level of playing field so that we can compete, that we can do the jobs, even if the Canadians were at a dollar and were at a dollar for the same job, it still makes sense to give it to a local fabricator because that local fabricator is then going to produce $1.50 for the local and regional economies. It's the economic multiplier, which is at work here who then generate as people spend locally for their groceries, for their vehicles, for their barber shops, for their restaurants, and diners, and all that, and clothing so forth and so on.

As they spend, because they're4212 being employed, they produce the economic multiplier, and4216 that just keeps going round and round. So it's the initial dollars that are spent, again, we're not asking for any change to the tax structure, we're not asking for an incentive or anything like that or a credit, we're asking to help us level the playing field by saying that our tax dollars, everybody in this room who paid into them by one way, shape, or form, and it's one penny out 6.5% sales tax that funds schools and beyond to get spent on local fabricators, domestic steel, from source to site. It's a better deal for Massachusetts.

HOLLY - So, now, the focus right now was good about Canadian competition but across the country, we're seeing other countries competing. China. for instance, Mexico and even though we're not seeing a lot of Chinese steel right now, it is coming across the country, and it will be here. So, we can't race to the bottom on tax structure to address the Canadians because this is going to be a global issue. When you have countries like China that have government owned steel mills and they can produce steel so much cheaper and produce it. I know of somebody who bids on the bigger projects like the stadiums who said, if he had donated all of his labor rate, he couldn't have matched the Chinese fabricated delivered steel to the United States. So, we can't really address tax issues when there are countries that just play unfair, we just level the playing field by, say, buy American, invest our dollars in our people.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

PAUL ZBIKOWSKI - NATIONAL FIRE SPRINKLER ASSOCIATION - HB 3108 - Thank you, Chairs and members of the committee. This is actually my first time testifying before you, I'm usually in front of the public safety committee as I was yesterday. I'm a 44-year veteran of the fire service, 25 as a fire chief and a certified fire inspector. I'm past president of Fire Chief Association of Mass, and I'm also the New England state coordinator for the National Fire Sprinkler Association and director of life safety for a company called Teacher Lot. In my spare time, I'm the state chair for an employer support of the Garden Reserve, so I'm all about safety and taking care of our people and helping our people work here in the Commonwealth. So, I'm here to support 3108, I think, by supporting the amended 3108 will assure that the safety devices going into these buildings will be available and as far as sprinklers and alarm systems and the components going into these buildings are available. We do believe in buying American, and not all our companies are poised like the Steel Industry as to provide for American. I can tell you as a company that I'm involved with teacher lock made in Fitchburg, all but one component of our lock now is made in America and probably in six months, that last component will be made in America. So, we believe in it, I believe in it, and we're working toward that. So, I support and we support 3108.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

JOHN DRINKWATER - PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES - HB 3012 - SB 2027 - Thank you, Chairman Collins, Chairman Cabral, as well as members of the committee for the opportunity to testify today. My name is John Drinkwater, I am the director4500 of government affairs for4502 the painters and allied trades district council 35, and also a city councilor in the city of Lowell. I missed the opportunity to testify alongside my colleagues in labor a little bit earlier today who I know talked a lot about the benefits of project labor agreements. In terms of delaying projects on time, on budget, by eliminating the possibility of delays due to labor disputes, as well as including a lot of important policy matters in the language of a PLA, including the inclusion of apprentices on a project to partnership with pre apprentice programs to ensure a continued pipeline skilled workers as well as the inclusion of diversity, equity, inclusion goals, the hiring goals for women and veterans, and a number of different important policy priorities that are included in the language of project labor agreements. So, I know you heard a lot about that, but I actually want to offer most of my common state in the context of a local elected official.

Because as the current environment would have it, as a local elected official, I've looked at this and delved into the body of evidence that is out there surrounding project labor agreements and come to the conclusion even along with the majority of colleagues on local authority or city council and decide that a project labor agreement along with all those policy priorities I just mentioned is in the public interest. We can't move4604 forward and authorize a project labor agreement because the policy in this area as a result of a number of legal challenges has essentially been able to be determined by the courts as opposed to4618 the legislature. What local officials are left in the position to do is to vote to authorize a feasibility study and in the context of municipal budgets, which are obviously on extremely tight margins, funding a feasibility study to tell you something that you've already researched and know is a difficult policy decision. We, in the city of Lowell along with many other cities are in the middle right now of developing a fiscal year budget and even in the 5th largest city in the Commonwealth with the near $500,000,000 budget, the decisions that have to be made that deal with the tens of thousands of dollars are significant.

We're in the middle of trying to figure out if we can create certain very needed positions within the city of Lowell, these are fiscal decisions that are made in the tens of thousands of dollars. So particularly when you're in the middle of a fiscal year in trying to make a decision on whether to fund a feasibility study to move forward with a project labor agreement, it's not even clear where that money will come from. Cities and towns don't necessarily have the option to pass a supplemental budget in the middle of a fiscal year to fund a study like this. You know, we're left in the position of potentially trying to find money through a transfer. So what I would suggest is that in this area, to give local elected officials, public bodies the ability to do what they could do in so many other areas, complicated policy areas, whether it's passing budgets, whether it's land acquisitions, eminent domain decisions, to do the research, look at the body of evidence that's out there and come to a decision as a public body on whether something, in this case, a project labor agreement, is in the public interest.

To give that authority to public bodies to make those democratic decisions. I will actually offer it because this is something that came up in the city of Lowell several years ago with respect to a very large and complicated high school projects, construction and major renovation, and it really got held up on the issue of funding4774 a feasibility study in the midst of a fiscal year. I just want to give an example to show kind of where we're at from a policy standpoint. As this was being discussed on the city council floor, rather than debate the merits of a project labor agreement on what it would provide as a matter of public interest, I'm going to read the motion that was brought forward on the council floor to demonstrate the complexity of the current system we're in. The motion was to request to authorize the city manager to hire an expert in construction and procurement methods, including construction industry labor relations to conduct and submit to the council a comparative study analyzing the lawfulness, usefulness, and propriety of utilizing a project labor agreement in connection with the Lowell high school project.

In order that, it'd be accomplished on budget, on schedule, and with reduced operation and maintenance costs, the study should evaluate the adoption of a project labor agreement to the extent it might satisfy the underlying goals of the Mass public bidding laws Chapter 149, Sections 44A through 44H. Now I can assure you that motion was not written by a public relations professional, that's the legal lease and the legal hoops that really need to be jumped through in order just to move forward on a basic matter of public policy. Looking at the evidence, elected officials may decide that it is in the public interest, they might may decide that it is not but what this Bill is really looking for is just to put that decision making authority back in the hands of local elected officials who can make these decisions for4872 their residents, workers in their community and the public in general. So, thank you very much4878 for the opportunity to testify on4880 this and would respectfully ask for a favorable report on H 3012 and S 2027.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CABRAL - I don't know if the question is appropriate to you or not, maybe Frank can answer. I know that we have an offshore wind project launching out of New Bedford right now, I know it's a PLA job, but there was a dispute with the longshoremen. So, I'm wondering if their contract is outside of the PLA or was it part of the PLA?

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

JOHN POURBAIX - CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES IN MASSACHUSETTS - HB 3001 - SB 1972 - Good morning, Chairman Collins, Chairman Cabral, members of the committee. My name is John Pourbaix, I'm the executive director of construction Industries5002 in Massachusetts, we're trade association that represents heavy and highway contractors. Our members build roads, bridges, transit, airports, pretty much anything horizontal along the ground our members build. We're here today to offer our strong support for House 3001 and Senate 1972 which would5028 require the awarding authorities to pay directly the police details. This legislation, I believe passed this committee, it was voted5040 favorably last session and ended up in third reading. Basically, the issue has come is that every public awarding authority that requires5055 a police detail and many5057 do because of the public safety aspect, and we strongly support that, each agency has their own procedures and policies as to orders the details who verifies that they're there and who pays for them.

In most of the agencies that we deal with, the contractor or the agency is responsible for ordering the detail and verifying the paperwork and all of that. The contractor in many agencies has5093 to pay that detail, becomes kind of like a third party or advances the funds and it has become a real mess. It's extremely costly for contractors, they have to administer it, and they also have to, in many cases, front the pay and that takes out of their line of credit, and it cost them a lot of money. That's from contractors that have that ability to pay forward. In many instances, other contracts just don't have the financial wherewithal to do that, and as a result, police details take anywhere from 60 to 90 days to pay for that detail. By the time the resident verifies the time, puts it on an estimate, goes back to the contractor, back to the resident engineer to sign it, then it goes into Boston, they have 30 days to pay for it or to approve it and it is another 30 days that it takes to pay and then the contractor gets the check and pays the details.

So, it basically can take anywhere from 16 to 90 days to pay for that detail. As a result, a lot of police don't want to work on road construction or public works because the time factor, they can do a private detail or, like, Gillette concert or the red sox or whatever and get paid within a week. As a result, we have several members throughout the last several years that have details not show up at the last minute, details commit to coming, don't show up, and then the work has to be canceled, which can cost a contract or anywhere from $10,000 to $40,000 on a canceled detailed, dependent upon how many people are working or working material has to be sent back and cannot be used, so that's a a huge5233 issue. The other thing that we're finding is, several years ago5244 there was a legislation passed5246 which allows the state5248 police to intercept or the control of the intercept payments if a contractor hasn't paid as details, and in most cases, the contractor has paid the detail, but it's an administrative mistake or a paperwork miscue where we've had contractors held up for $500,000 because someone mistook ABC, I shouldn't use that, use Ebony Construction or Apnea Construction instead of Apnea public works, and that gets really held up and by the time that is resolved to be a couple months before the contractor gets paid.

The other issue that's really happened in the last couple, it's happened this year is in districts 1, 2,3 of them for the Mass DOT agency that's Western Mass, Central Mass out to kind of like the Worcester area in West. The state police are now requiring that the contractor get their police details through off duty management and what they're5324 doing is off duty management, you have no choice but to5328 go through them, but they add a 10% surcharge to the bill and Mass DOT has a policy as I think it's state law that you know like a pump of agency can't pay for an administrative fee. So right now, the only way for a contractor to get the details on his job is to go through this organization but that's still trying to be worked out as to how that 10% is going to be paid. So, there's a bunch of5359 issues we think if we5361 had the agencies pay directly, they order them, they verify and they do all the paperwork, why not have them write a check? The police will get paid much quicker and they'll have a real incentive to show up for public works construction. So, this kind of our story.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CABRAL - Let me try to clear here. Right now, the general contractor would pay the detail, right? I mean, the general contractor pays the detail?

POURBAIX - Yes.

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE

CABRAL - Do they pay right away, or they wait till they get the money?

POURBAIX - It depends, Chairman. Some of the larger contractors will advance that pay, and they take a line of credit out to do that. Other contractors just don't have the financial wherewithal to do that, so it depends. But right now, the contractor is not obligated to pay the5427 detail until they're paid and it basically can 60 to 90 days to get that.

CABRAL - Because of the reimbursement back from the agency?

POURBAIX - Exactly.

CABRAL - So what you're saying is5441 some contractors actually are not paying up upfront that detail, they only pay when they get the money from that particular agency?

SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE