BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2036
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 2036 (Bill Berryhill)
As Amended August 27, 2010
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: | |(May 20, 2010) |SENATE: |32-0 |(August 30, |
| | | | | |2010) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
(vote not relevant)
Original Committee Reference: JUD.
SUMMARY : Requires state departments and local agencies to
provide, at no charge, an electronic copy of the project's
contract documents to a contractor plan room service upon
request from the contractor plan room service.
The Senate amendments delete the Assembly version of this bill,
and instead require:
1)State departments, upon request from a contractor plan room
service, to provide, at no charge, an electronic copy of a
project's contract documents to the contractor plan room
service.
2)Local agencies when taking bids for the construction of a
public work or improvement to provide, at no charge, an
electronic copy of the project's contract documents to a
contractor plan room upon request from the contractor plan
room service.
EXISTING LAW :
1)The State Contract Act (Act) governs contract practices
between state departments and private contractors.
2)The Act defines "project" to include the erection,
construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any state
structure, building, road, or other state improvement of any
kind that will exceed a total cost of $250,000.
3)The Act defines "department" to mean the Department of Water
Resources, the Department of General Services, the Department
AB 2036
Page 2
of Boating and Waterways, the Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation, the Military Department, and the Department of
Transportation.
4)The Local Agency Public Construction Act sets forth the
procedures local agencies are required to use when soliciting
and evaluating bids or proposals for the construction of a
public work or improvement.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill limited the existing right
of public entities to withhold payment to contractors and
subcontractors when a stop notice is received to provide for
reasonable litigation costs associated with the stop notice such
that the right could be exercised only if the original
contractor fails to promptly accept a tender of defense of the
public entity in the litigation.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : According to the author, "?a number of public
entities in California are requiring contractors,
subcontractors, and material suppliers to pay for the plans and
specification documents" on the particular bid solicitation for
the proposed public works project. That fee is often between
$100 and $500 per project.
The author notes that, historically, public entities authorized
those seeking to examine project plans for the purpose of
determining whether or not to bid on the proposed project to
simply take the plans and specifications after paying a deposit,
which was returned if the plans were returned to the public
entity in good condition.
The author also states that many construction firms are often
too small to pay non-refundable charges for plans and other bid
documents, thus reducing the competition for these bids and
potentially driving up the overall contract price for public
entities. Furthermore, small, minority, and women-owned
business are among those firms unable to compete because of
these charges.
Many builders' exchanges and other contractor groups operate
"contractor plan room services," which allow their members to
view hard copy plans or download plans and specifications for
projects throughout the state. Many of these services have
AB 2036
Page 3
become online plan services. The author notes these contractor
plan rooms do not have the resources to purchase plans and other
bid documents from public entities. Electronic plans and
documents avoid the cost of printing for the public entity, and
the construction industry can easily accept and utilize these
documents.
Support arguments: Supporters might say this bill would make it
economically feasible for more businesses to submit bids for the
construction of a public work or improvement.
Opposition arguments: Opposition might say this bill would
increase costs and personnel time for public entities when
bidding out for the construction of a public work or
improvement.
The subject matter of this bill has not been heard in any
Assembly policy committee this legislative session.
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer R. Klein / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958
FN:
0006831