BILL ANALYSIS
AB 635
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 635 (Committee on Accountability and Administrative Review)
As Amended August 20, 2010
2/3 vote. Urgency
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 14, 2009) |SENATE: |33-1 |(August 27, |
| | | | | |2010) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant)
Original Committee Reference: G.O.
SUMMARY : Requires an architect, engineer, or roofing consultant
to disclose financial relationships with persons in connection
with a public school or community college roofing project
contract, and redefines equal substitutes allowed for specific
roofing materials.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill,
and instead:
1)Require an architect, engineer, or roofing consultant to
disclose financial relationships with persons in connection
with a public school or community college roofing project
contract and to complete and sign a certification, as
specified, stating that he or she has not received or will not
receive or give financial incentives, to or from a person in
connection with the roofing project contract, when a bid is
awarded.
2)Impose a civil penalty of $1,000 against an architect,
engineer, or roofing consultant who falsifies a certification
or fails to disclose a financial relationship in a
certification.
3)Define a roofing material as equal if all the following
conditions are met:
a) The item is at least equal in quality, durability,
design, and appearance but not necessarily of an identical
color;
b) The item will perform the intended function at least
equally well; and,
AB 635
Page 2
c) The item conforms substantially, even with deviations,
to the detailed requirements contained in the
specifications.
4)Require that the specifications for any roof project be
designed to promote competition.
5)Exempt school districts and community colleges from the
provisions of this bill when emergency works of improvement
are necessary.
6)Allow an individual to report bid rigging by involving local
entities to the Attorney General or the Bureau of State Audits
Whistleblower Hotline.
7)Define the following terms for the purposes of this bill:
a) "Architect" means an architect who has a current license
issued by the state;
b) "District" means a school district with an average daily
attendance greater than 2,500 or a community college
district;
c) "Engineer" means an engineer who has a current license
issued by the state;
d) "Public facility" means a public school or community
college;
e) "Roofing consultant" means a consultant who is
registered by RCI (formerly Roof Consultants Institute);
f) "Roof project" means a project for the replacement or
repair of a roof of a public facility, except that "roof
project" does not include a project for the repair of 25%
or less of the roof or a repair project that has a total
cost of $21,000 or less; and,
g) "Substitute" or "substitution" means a material,
product, thing, or service proposed by a bidder to be an
adequate substitute material, product, thing, or service
that is equal to an item designated in specifications.
AB 635
Page 3
8)Add an urgency clause.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Prohibits a state agency, political subdivision, municipal
corporation, district, or public officer responsible for
letting a public works contract from drafting bid
specifications that limits the bidding to any one concern or
product, unless the specification is followed by the words "or
equal."
2)Requires that these bid specifications provide a period of
time prior to or after, or prior to and after, the award of
the contract to allow the contractor to submit data that
demonstrates that a product or services to be provided under
the contract is equal to the services or product identified in
the bid specification.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill required that a state or
local agency, including a city, county, city and county, or
district, shall not prohibit a firefighter from using an air
purifying device during a wildland fire.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS : This bill was substantially amended in the Senate and
the Assembly-approved provisions of this bill were deleted.
This bill, as amended in the Senate is inconsistent with
Assembly Actions.
This bill originated from a June 30, 2010 hearing held by the
Assembly Accountability and Administrative Review Committee.
The Committee found that there was limited competition in public
projects to replace roofs because of alleged big rigging taking
place that favored certain roofing material vendors, resulting
in increased contract costs.
Current law prohibits an entity letting a bid from requiring
public works bid specifications that require specific brand
materials or that limits bidding to one material, product, or
service, unless an "or equal" clause is applied, allowing
bidders to provide equal materials, products, or services as a
substitute. The bid specifications must also provide a time
period prior to, after, or prior to and after, the award of a
contract, for a contractor to submit data substantiating that
AB 635
Page 4
items are equal when requesting permission to use substitutes.
If no time period is specified, data may be submitted any time
within 35 days after the award of a contract.
Existing law allows contractors who are not awarded a contract
to file a bid protest.
Analysis Prepared by : Joanna Gin / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301
FN: 0006825