Contractors: limited liability companies.
Summary
Existing law, the Beverly-Killea Limited Liability Company Act, authorizes a limited liability company to engage in any lawful business activity, except as specified, but prohibits construing the act to permit a limited liability company to render professional services, as defined. Existing law, the Contractors' State License Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of contractors by the Contractors' State License Board. Existing law authorizes the issuance of contractors' licenses to individual owners, partnerships, and corporations and authorizes those persons and entities to qualify for a license by the appearance of specified individuals. Existing law authorizes the board to set application, licensure, and renewal fees, among others, and provides for the deposit of those fees in the Contractors' License Fund, a continuously appropriated fund. Existing law prohibits licensed contractors from performing specified acts and makes a violation of certain of those provisions a crime. This bill would authorize a limited liability company to render services that may be lawfully rendered only pursuant to a license, certificate, or registration authorized by the Business and Professions Code if the provisions of that code authorize a limited liability company to hold that license, certificate, or registration. The bill would authorize the Contractors' State License Board, commencing no later than January 1, 2012, to issue a contractor's license to a limited liability company and would authorize the responsible managing manager, responsible managing officer, responsible managing member, or responsible managing employee of the limited liability company to qualify for that license. The bill would also require, as a condition precedent to the issuance, reissuance, reinstatement, reactivation, renewal, or continued valid use of a limited liability company contractor's license, that the applicant or licensee file or have on file a surety bond in the sum of $100,000 for damages arising out of specified claims of employees. The bill would also require the limited liability company to maintain a policy or policies of insurance against liability imposed on or against it for damages arising out of claims, as specified, as a condition of licensure, and would require the licensed limited liability company to provide a notice concerning that insurance or security in certain contracts, as specified. The bill would provide for the personal liability of persons within the limited liability company in a certain instance, except as specified. The bill would also enact related, conforming provisions. Because the bill would impose various fees on limited liability companies that apply for and obtain a contractor's license, the bill would increase the amount of revenue deposited in the Contractors' License Fund, thereby making an appropriation. In addition, because a violation of specified provisions of the Contractors' State License Law by a limited liability company licensed pursuant to these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law makes various provisions of the Contractors' State License Law applicable to the member, officer, or director, among others, of a licensed contractor. This bill would delete the term "member" from those provisions and, in specified instances, insert the term "partner." Existing law makes it unlawful for a person who has been a member, officer, director, or responsible managing officer of a licensed organization to individually engage in the business of a contractor without a license. This bill would extend that prohibition to individuals listed in the personnel of record of the licensed organization and to certain other managing persons in the organization. Under existing law, at the time of application for renewal of a license, the responsible managing individual of a licensee must file a statement with the registrar verifying his or her capacity as a responsible managing individual to the licensee. This bill would make that requirement applicable to the current qualifying individual for a licensee. Under existing law, no license may be renewed, reissued, or reinstated while a surety remains unreimbursed for a loss or expense sustained on a bond issued for the licensee or for an entity of which an officer, director, partner, manager, or qualifying person was an officer, director, partner, manager, or qualifying person of the licensee while the licensee was subject to suspension or disciplinary action, as specified. This bill would instead specify that, during any period in which a surety remains unreimbursed for a loss or expense sustained on a bond issued, as specified, the license for which the bond was issued, and any other license on which any member of the licensee's personnel of record, as defined, has also been listed, may not be renewed, reissued, or reinstated while the licensee was subject to suspension or disciplinary action, as specified. Existing law allows a contractor's license number to be reissued or reassigned to a corporation in specified instances. This bill would allow a contractor's license number to be reissued or reassigned to a limited liability company in those instances, to a limited liability company formed to continue the business of a corporation, and to a corporation or limited liability company that acquires a licensee pursuant to an asset sale if the corporation or limited liability company has a qualifier, as specified. Existing law also allows a contractor's license number to be reissued or reassigned to an immediate family member of a licensed individual who is deceased or absent if the license is required to continue an existing family contracting business or to a corporation created by immediate family members of a licensed individual to continue an existing deceased or absent individual licensee's contracting business. Existing law defines an immediate family member to include a spouse, brother, sister, son, daughter, grandson, or granddaughter, among others. This bill would specify that an immediate family member includes a father and mother. The bill would make other technical, nonsubstantive changes. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2009
Committee Review
Aug 2010
Senate Passage
May 2009
Assembly Passage
Aug 2010
Signed into Law
Sep 2010
Introduced Feb 26, 2009
Signed Sep 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Aug 30, 2010 · Assembly Aug 26, 2010
How they voted
33–0
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 35
Aug 30, 2010
D
Democratic23
91% Yea
R
Republican12
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
38
Key actions
12
Committee
11
Amendments
3
Sep 30, 2010
Signed into law
Approved by Governor.
legislature
Aug 30, 2010
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (33-0-2)
senate
Aug 30, 2010
Introduced
Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 5002.) To enrollment.
upper
Aug 26, 2010
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (57-0-3)
assembly
Aug 5, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on August 4.)
lower
Aug 5, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.)
lower
Jun 23, 2010
Committee
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 22, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 15.)
lower
Jun 22, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.)
lower
Jul 9, 2009
Lower · Passed
Set, first hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
lower
Jun 29, 2009
Lower · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
lower
Jun 16, 2009
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 16.)
lower
Jun 16, 2009
Committee
From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
May 12, 2009
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 848.)
upper
Apr 29, 2009
Committee
From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 701.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 20, 2009
Committee
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Apr 16, 2009
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 806.)
upper
Feb 26, 2009
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
DF
Dean Florez
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 392
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 392. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline