Cali C0ntractors license?

[peteyt]

hiya Y'all,

I am getting everything together to get a california limited specialty license.
Has anyone done this recently (or ever, I suppose)?
What's it like?
It's a little daunting on paper: the application to take the test (on Law and Business only, not Trees) says that I am to prove 4 years of apprentice/journeyman experience. Uh, ok. You can also show certification of work as being self-employed or having other people write recs for you vouching for your work. I have 2 years I can get a rec in traditional employ in a small tree company, but I'm not sure I would consider them to be as a "journeyman". I was in orchards and markets before that - does that count? I am going to have to fill it in with my self-employment and some letters from contractors/clients I have worked with. I certainly don't have the paperwork to show 4 years as an apprentice, but I know what I am doing with trees and their owners and I don't want to have to lie about it. I've been studying the materials for the Law exam and know the kinda useful material enough to take a multiple choice test. The application gives no place to explain one's situation other than through the context of apprenticeship. I'm confused and more than a little paranoid about it.

I expect there to be *some* bar to get into proper business here, but the letter of the law here seems tough. Are they going to let me take the test or will they just take my application fee ($300) and put my name on a black list for even applying? I need to get a license - I'm limited by what I projects I can take w/o a license. pretty much smaller stuff, one man jobs. I do OK, but I need to do better. I also want to do the right thing. But I'm worried about just filing the application.

It is soooooo tempting to rant on and on and on about it (you can PM me for that haha), but really I just need to get it over with! I am just looking for some perspective and advice if anyone out there has some.
Thanks All!
Pete

 

[fireaxe]

Is this an industry specific license?

We have a contractor's license in VA and my impression of the process is that they want to make sure that you know and understand business processes. They do not have one specifically for trees. The license classes are A, B, C and the levels are determined by sales of your firm.

The most daunting part for me was creating the financial report that had to accompany the Class A license app. The test was not really difficult. The required business classes were a bit of a pain.

 

[just_a_tree_guy]

contractors must have a contractors license in my state . no test to take or anything . just send the state $50 dollars BAM you have your license . just seems like a way the state can make up another way to get into the workers pocket .another tax if you ask me . OOOOOO you dont work well here is a check for you buddy .

 

[jomoco]

Brush up on your math skills.

How much fertilizer will it take to cover X number of SQ FT at a 20-1 dilution?

I know guys that had to be tutored for weeks to pass the test.

I studied the test manuals for a week and passed it on my first try back in the early 90's. But I had gobs of experience. The math was the only thing I had to really think hard about.

I've heard it's more difficult these days though.

You're testing for C-49 right?

Jomoco

 

[peteyt]

Yeah - the math and the numbers are all of over, I think. Business management practices, California Labor Law, Mechanics Liens.
I have a Law manual I borrowed from a friend who is a landscape contractor (they have to test on Trade skills as well.) I've studied a bunch and I'm just going to take it when my application clears (in several months, at least). If i fail, I can take it again.

fireaxe - yep - tree specific, but i don't get tested on trees, just Law and Business. If you are working for more than $500 or on a tree over 15' tall, you are to have a license.

jomoco - it is a C-61 limited specialty, then under that, it is D-49 Tree Services. it took me quite a while after moving back out here in 2007 that you even needed a license at all, as there is no place where all of these things are easily shown together.

just_a_tree_guy - gee whiz! if this were only a matter of sending the state my $50 and my information, I would have done it long ago. because the process here is so involved, a lot of people don't do it. You also see a lot of people working trees that shouldn't be - hauling companies, landscaping crews, plenty of unlicensed folks, too. "you don't need a license, just clients". "oh don't get the license, because then they've got their hook in you!" are a couple of things I have heard. THere is some value in the state knowing who is doing what. If the bar was lower, they would know more, ironically.. PLenty of hacks with licenses out there. I know some other people who do smaller aesthetic work and don't bother with the license.

OK - gotta get outta here now and harass some acacia and bamboo - later!

 

[jomoco]

Yes, CA is a pita place to operate in as a state licensed contractor. CARB has under cover tinted window vans surreptitiously filming licensed tree crews at work. Then writing them tickets if their equipment doesn't meet the new emissions stands like the Soviet NKVD of the cold war era!

Many guys I know have given up, sold their equipment, or moved out of state. Others have switched to a bare bones skeleton operation and joined the low bid low profile operators that seem so prolific these days in SoCal.

This economy really sucks these days in CA. Worst I can remember in my life here in fact.

Jomoco

 

[bwktreeserv]

In Oregon we have to have a CCB (construction contractor's license to legally do tree work. It is a major hassle to have to learn all these building construction rules and reg's but it insured that anyone doing tree work in Oregon is bonded and insured. That part is good for the customer.

-BEN

 

[peteyt]

egads - i thought i had to learn all the building stuff at first, glad i don't. i have met a few building contractors here that are incredulous that i have to have any sort of contractor's license at all. FUnny, it isn't the license that is really important for everyone, it is the insurance. Making it hard to get a license makes it hard for people to get insurance, kind of the opposite of what the state would want, methinks. I'd love to see a two-tiered license - one for individuals, another for when you have a larger company workers comp etc.

yeah, jomoco - i'm keeping things small in my business up here. I don't even own a chipper yet, easy to rent when I need one. no sense in competing with all of the larger companies in the bay area/CA. I've talked to a few guys that have really scaled back since 2007. That's when i moved back here - there were no jobs available, so I just did my own thing. And that is finally starting to pan out. Lots of residential garden-scale tree and shrub work, bigger things on occasion if it feels all right. I have to pass on most of the larger stuff, but I work a niche that is hard for crews to get at - not worth their time.

well, my recommendations are coming together, guess i gotta keep on studying. apparently it takes quite a while for the application to even go through.
dude, i gotta get caught back up on the "suckers" thread - those things will just run away if you don't stay on 'em =)
pt

 

[mdvaden]

[ QUOTE ]
In Oregon we have to have a CCB (construction contractor's license to legally do tree work. It is a major hassle to have to learn all these building construction rules and reg's but it insured that anyone doing tree work in Oregon is bonded and insured. That part is good for the customer.

-BEN

[/ QUOTE ]

You can do tree work legally in Oregon with a CCB or LCB license.

A few like myself, or Collier, have the landscape board license.

Not sure, but Collier may have the CCB and LCB. But I know he passed the landscape exams. If you have CCB, be glad you don't have to deal with the landscape exams. I think they are too extreme for the nature of the work, with the exception of irrigation maybe because that's tapped-into the water system.