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.