BILL ANALYSIS Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair 635 (De La Torre) Hearing Date: 8/12/2010 Amended: 8/5/2010 Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: G O 6-2 _________________________________________________________________ ____ BILL SUMMARY: AB 635, an urgency measure, would require a school district, community college district, state university, or state agency to require decisions, as to whether proposed substitute items in connection with a project to replace or repair a roof are equal, to be made by an independent architect, engineer, or roofing consultant. This bill would set forth requirements for the bidding specifications for these roofing projects. This bill would require an architect, engineer, roofing consultant, and other specified persons or entities to sign a certification related to financial relationships. This bill would require a school district, community college district, state university, or state agency to publish on its Internet Web site certain information pertaining to roofing projects. This bill would also authorize the State Allocation Board, the Office of Public School Construction, and the Department of General Services to provide educational programs, information or online material to school and state government administrators in relation to these matters. By imposing duties on school districts, this bill would create a state mandated local program. _________________________________________________________________ ____ Fiscal Impact (in thousands) Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Fund Increased roof project Unknown, major costs ongoing General*/ bid and oversight Special/ requirements Bond * State mandated local program costs reimbursable from the General Fund _________________________________________________________________ ____ STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File. For the purposes of this bill, a roof project means a project for the replacement or repair of a roof of a public facility. The provisions of the bill would not apply to new construction. This bill would set forth the requirements by which, for any roof project, a material, project, thing, or service shall be considered equal. This bill would require any roof project to name a minimum of three separate manufacturers that share no financial, partnership, or subsidiary relationships, or interests, or shared product lines or require performance standards that at least three manufacturers have indicated, in writing, in advance of the bidding period, the ability to comply. Specifications requiring proprietary products or a proprietary warranty may not be included in specifications for a roof project if these items would cost more than ten Page 2 AB 635 (De La Torre) percent more than for similar projects utilizing open competitive bidding without a requirement for proprietary products or a proprietary warranty. If a substitution is offered in a bid for a roof project, the district or governmental body shall require decisions on whether the proposed substitution is equal to be made by an independent architect, engineer, or roofing consultant based on industry standards. Preliminary information indicates the cost to require decisions on whether a proposed substitution is equal may increase a roof project by up to $10,000. The Los Angeles Community College District has, at this time, nearly 30 roofs needing replacement. If the independent review increased the cost of each project by $5,000 to $10,000, the district would have increased state mandated costs of $150,000 to $300,000. The district is approximately ten percent of community college system. K-12 school districts would incur similar per project costs. The California State University and all state agencies would also incur such costs. To the extent the independent review resulted in an equal substitution of a lower cost, the project may have savings over the initial specifications. A district or governmental body shall ensure and verify in writing that an architect, engineer, or roofing consultant develops the plans and specifications for a roof project to ensure the project conforms to state codes. However, if a substitution is offered, and determined equal by the independent review noted above, this may require the initial architect, engineer, or roofing consultant or district or governmental body to verify a project that now uses materials the project was not initially designed for. This may result in the initial architect, engineer, or roofing consultant incurring increased costs or liability resulting from having to certify a project that person may not determine is equal. This could increase project costs.