Can a New York city enter intermunicipal agreements with other cities so that a master plumber certified in one city can perform plumbing work in another without separate testing, and can a city waive certification for plumbers from outside who want to do just one job?

Subject

Authority of one New York city to recognize another city's master plumber certification through intermunicipal agreement; whether a city may waive certification for a non-resident plumber doing only one job per calendar year in the city.

Source

• Landing page: https://ag.ny.gov/libraries-documents/opinions/opinions-year
• Original PDF: https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/I_96-44_pw.pdf

Plain-English summary

The City of Olean was looking for a way to make its plumbing-trade licensing more practical. Salamanca, a nearby city, had few licensed master plumbers; Olean's own plumbers wanted to do work there, and vice versa. Both cities wanted to avoid duplicate testing and the bottleneck of waiting for the other city's examining board. The Olean city attorney asked two questions: could Olean enter reciprocal agreements with neighboring cities so that a certified Olean master plumber could work in Salamanca and vice versa, and could Olean waive certification for an out-of-city plumber who wanted to do just one job per year in Olean?

The AG split the answers. On reciprocity, the AG noted the long-standing rule under General City Law Article 4 (§§ 40, 44, 45) that each city certifies its own master plumbers, and that a certificate from one city does not, by itself, authorize a plumber to work in another (People ex rel. Lavier v Hessler). Plumbing-trade regulation is a matter of State concern that cannot be overridden by local law (Ainslie v Lounsberry).

However, the AG turned to N.Y. Const. art. IX, § 1(c) and General Municipal Law §§ 119-n(c) and 119-o(1), which authorize local governments to cooperate jointly on any service, undertaking, or function that each could provide separately. Plumber certification fits within that authority, so cities can enter into reciprocity agreements. The AG added an important guardrail: any such agreement must be consistent with the purpose of General City Law Article 4 to ensure that plumbing work is performed by competent individuals. That means the participating cities and their examining boards must standardize examinations and qualifications to a level that serves all participants. A city cannot simply rubber-stamp another city's certificate without first satisfying itself that the underlying examination protects the home-city residents.

On the second question (a per-job waiver), the AG said no. The statutory text in General City Law § 45 is categorical: no person may conduct the trade of plumbing as a master plumber in a city without first obtaining a certificate of competency from that city's board. The statute contains no de minimis exception, so a city cannot create one by local action.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Why does each New York city run its own master plumber exam?
Because Article 4 of the General City Law has been on the books for decades and reflects a deliberate choice to leave each city's examining board to test applicants under conditions it deems appropriate. As the Appellate Division observed in People ex rel. Lavier v Hessler, the statute does not prescribe uniformity; each board determines fitness independently. The result is a patchwork.

What is an intermunicipal cooperation agreement?
General Municipal Law §§ 119-n and 119-o (Article 5-G) implement N.Y. Const. art. IX, § 1(c), which authorizes local governments to "agree with one or more other local governments to provide cooperatively, jointly or by contract any facility, service, activity or undertaking which each participating local government has the power to provide separately." The statute applies broadly; municipalities use Article 5-G agreements for everything from shared snow removal to consolidated dispatch centers to, as here, reciprocal occupational licensing.

Why does reciprocity require standardized examinations?
Because the underlying State policy (in General City Law Article 4) is that plumbers must be competent to protect public health and safety. A city that hands out its certificates based on a reciprocity letter alone is, in effect, importing the other city's standards. If those standards are lower, the home city is shortchanging its residents. The AG required that the participating cities and their boards work out a common standard before reciprocity can take effect.

Why couldn't Olean waive certification for one-job-a-year visitors?
Because General City Law § 45 has no minimum-work threshold. It says it "shall not be lawful in any city of this state for a person to conduct such trade, business or calling, unless he shall have first obtained a certificate of competency from such board." Once a person is performing plumbing work in a city as a master plumber, the certification requirement applies. A local waiver for low-volume work would directly conflict with the State statute.

Can a state-issued license replace a city-issued one?
At the time of this opinion, no. New York's plumbing-trade regulation was city-by-city under Article 4 of the General City Law. Some states have a statewide master plumber license; New York did not, at least not as the comprehensive substitute for city certification described in the opinion. (The current statutory and regulatory landscape may differ, see the Currency note above.)

Background and statutory framework

Article 4 of the General City Law dates from the early twentieth century and divides the regulation of the plumbing trade across each of the State's cities. Section 40 defines "employing or master plumber" as a person having a regular place of business who performs plumbing work (either personally or through journeyman plumbers in his employ). Section 44(2) creates the city examining board of plumbers, with jurisdiction to examine and certify applicants. Section 45 makes it unlawful to operate as a master plumber in any city without that city's certificate. People ex rel. Lavier v Hessler (1912) is the leading judicial application of the structure to a cross-city scenario, and Ainslie v Lounsberry (1949) confirmed that plumbing-trade regulation is a State concern that local law cannot displace.

Intermunicipal cooperation under N.Y. Const. art. IX, § 1(c) and General Municipal Law Article 5-G is a different (and more recent) layer. The constitutional and statutory framework allows local governments to combine their efforts on virtually any service or function. The AG's view in this opinion was that an Article 5-G agreement could lawfully implement reciprocal recognition of master plumber certifications, as long as the participating cities agreed in advance on examination standards and qualifications.

The opinion did not resolve a related question that some cities have wrestled with since: whether a private exam (such as one administered by a trade association under nationally recognized testing standards) could substitute for the city's own board exam under an Article 5-G framework. The AG left the door open by tying validity to "standardized" examinations and qualifications "to meet the needs of the participating cities," which contemplates standards developed among the cities themselves, not necessarily a third-party exam.

Citations

• N.Y. Const. art. IX, § 1(c) (intermunicipal cooperation)
• General City Law § 40 (definition of "employing or master plumber")
• General City Law § 44(2) (city examining board of plumbers)
• General City Law § 45 (certification requirement)
• General Municipal Law § 119-n(c) (definition of "joint service")
• General Municipal Law § 119-o(1) (authority for cooperation agreements)
• People ex rel. Lavier v Hessler, 152 App Div 839 (4th Dept 1912)
• Ainslie v Lounsberry, 275 App Div 729, lv denied, 275 App Div 865 (3d Dept 1949)

Original opinion text

NY CONST, ART IX, § 1(c); GENERAL CITY LAW, ART 4, §§ 40, 44, 45;
GENERAL MUNICIPAL LAW §§ 119-n(c), 119-o(1).
The City of Olean may enter into inter-municipal agreements with other similar cities for the reciprocal
recognition of certifications of employing or master plumbers provided that examinations and
qualifications have been standardized to meet the needs of the participating cities. A city may not waive
the requirement that an employing or master plumber be certified even where the applicant wishes to
undertake no more than one job in the city in any calendar year.
December 31, 1996

John M. Hart, Jr., Esq.
City Attorney
City of Olean
P. O. Box 668
Olean, NY 14760-0668

Informal Opinion
No. 96-44

Dear Mr. Hart:
You have informed us that the City of Olean is considering reciprocal agreements with other cities for
certifying employing or master plumbers to perform plumbing work in Olean and in the other cities
subject to agreements. For example, Olean is considering entering into an inter-municipal agreement
with the City of Salamanca, which does not have a significant number of licensed employing or master
plumbers. Through such an agreement, employing or master plumbers licensed to do plumbing work in
Olean could also work in Salamanca. The City of Olean is also contemplating agreements with other
cities. The goal is to avoid the expense of duplication in testing and licensing of employing or master
plumbers and to ensure the availability of licensed plumbers to perform plumbing work. You ask
whether the city may enter into such agreements.
Also, you inquire whether the city may waive testing and full background investigation for a certified
master plumber from another municipality where the master plumber wishes to undertake no more than
one job in the City of Olean in any calendar year.
The regulation of the plumbing trade is governed by Article 4 of the General City Law. An "employing
or master plumber" means a person having a regular place of business and who by himself or through
journeyman plumbers in his employ performs plumbing work. General City Law § 40. The city's
examining board of plumbers has

jurisdiction over and . . . examine[s] all persons desiring or intending to engage in the trade,
business or calling of plumbing as employing plumbers in the city in which such board shall
be appointed.

Id., § 44(2). The board is empowered to examine persons applying for certificates of competency as
employing or master plumbers in order to determine their fitness and qualifications. Id., § 44(2).

A person desiring or intending to conduct the trade, business or calling of a plumber or of
plumbing in a city of this state as employing or master plumber, shall be required to submit
to an examination before such examining board of plumbers as to his experience and
qualifications for such trade, business or calling, and it shall not be lawful in any city of this
state for a person to conduct such trade, business or calling, unless he shall have first
obtained a certificate of competency from such board of the city in which he conducts or
proposes to conduct such business.

Id., § 45.

The above provisions have been cited in concluding that a certificate of competency issued by an
examining board of plumbers in one city may not be used as a basis for allowing an employing or master
plumber to practice the trade of plumbing in another city. People ex rel. Lavier v Hessler, 152 App Div
839 (4th Dept 1912); 1912 Op Atty Gen (Inf) 167. The cited provisions clearly contemplate that the
examining board of plumbers of each city examine applicants who desire to enter the plumbing trade as
employing or master plumbers in that city. As was pointed out by the court in People ex rel. Lavier v
Hessler, supra, 152 App Div at 842, the statutory provisions do not prescribe uniformity in the tests or
examinations administered by examining boards of plumbers to applicants for certification as employing
or master plumbers. Each board provides its own method of ascertaining the fitness of the applicant and
conditions may not be alike in any two cities. Id.

The provisions of the General City Law regulating the trade of plumbing have been determined by the
courts to be matters of State concern, which, therefore, may not be superseded by local law. Ainslie v
Lounsberry, 275 App Div 729, lv denied, 275 App Div 865 (3d Dept 1949); 1982 Op Atty Gen (Inf) 219;
1975 Op Atty Gen (Inf) 277.
Neither the courts nor opinions of this office, however, have considered whether municipalities may
enter into inter-municipal agreements regarding certification of employing or master plumbers in
accordance with constitutional authority. Under Article IX, § 1(c) of the State Constitution, local
governments, as authorized by the Legislature, are given power to agree with one or more other local
governments

to provide cooperatively, jointly or by contract any facility, service, activity or undertaking
which each participating local government has the power to provide separately.

For purposes of municipal cooperation, the Legislature has defined "joint service" to mean

joint provision of any municipal facility, service, activity, project or undertaking or the joint
performance or exercise of any function or power which each of the municipal corporations
or districts has the power by any other general or special law to provide, perform or
exercise, separately and, to effectuate the purposes of this article, shall include extension of
appropriate territorial jurisdiction necessary therefor.

General Municipal Law § 119-n(c). Municipalities have been authorized to enter into agreements for the
performance of their respective functions, powers and duties on a joint or cooperative basis. Id., § 119-o(1).
Under these provisions, municipalities may enter into inter-municipal agreements to jointly or
cooperatively exercise any function or power which each of the participants has the power
independently to perform.
In our view, cities may enter into inter-municipal agreements under the constitutional and statutory
authority whereby certificates of competency issued by an examining board of plumbers in one city are
recognized by other cities participating in the agreements. The authority to enter into municipal
cooperation agreements is constitutionally derived and the Legislature has implemented this authority
very broadly. Municipal cooperation is authorized with respect to any activity, service, undertaking, or
facility which each of the participating municipalities has the power separately to effectuate. NY Const,
Art IX, § 1(c).
We believe, however, that municipal cooperation agreements must also be consistent with the purpose
of Article 4 of the General City Law to ensure that the plumbing trade is carried out by competent
individuals in order to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the residents of the city where
they perform their work. Thus, in our view, as part of any inter-municipal agreement, the examining
boards of plumbers and the legislative bodies of the participating cities must establish standardized
examinations and other criteria to measure the qualifications of employing or master plumbers to do
plumbing work within the participating cities. City residents, therefore, can be assured that the
qualifications of an employing or master plumber who has been certified elsewhere, have also been
approved by their city officials, and are designed to protect their interests.
In response to your first question then, we believe that the City of Olean may enter into inter-municipal
cooperation agreements with other cities whereby there is reciprocal recognition of certificates of
competency of master or employing plumbers, provided that examination and qualification requirements
have been standardized to meet the needs of the participating cities.
As your second inquiry, you have asked whether, without an inter-municipal contract, the City of Olean
may waive testing and background investigation for certified employing or master plumbers from other
municipalities where the applicant wishes to undertake no more than one job in the city in any calendar
year.
We see no authority for this waiver. It is clear under the provisions of the General City Law that every
employing or master plumber desiring to engage in plumbing work in a city must be certified by the
examining board of plumbers of that city. There is no minimum amount of work specified for which
certification is not required.
We conclude that the City of Olean may enter into inter-municipal agreements with other cities for the
reciprocal recognition of certifications of employing or master plumbers provided that examinations and
qualifications have been standardized to meet the needs of the participating cities. A city may not waive
the requirement that an employing or master plumber be certified even where the applicant wishes to
undertake no more than one job in the city in any calendar year.
The Attorney General renders formal opinions only to officers and departments of State government.
This perforce is an informal and unofficial expression of the views of this office.
Very truly yours,

JAMES D. COLE
Assistant Attorney General
in Charge of Opinions