BILL ANALYSIS SB 694 Page 1 Date of Hearing: June 16, 2010 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT Cameron Smyth, Chair SB 694 (Correa) - As Amended: May 18, 2010 SENATE VOTE : 36-0 SUBJECT : Public contracts: public works: competitive bidding: procedures. SUMMARY : Requires a request for a review by the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (Commission) from an interested party who has presented evidence that the work is to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less expensively by the public agency, to be in writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than eight business days from the date the public agency has rejected all bids. Specifically, this bill : 1)Requires a request for a review by the Commission from an interested party who has presented evidence that the work is to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less expensively by the public agency, to be in writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than eight business days from the date the public agency has rejected all bids. 2)Requires a request for a review by the Commission from an interested party who has presented evidence that the work exceeded the force account limits or the work has been improperly classified as maintenance to be in writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than eight days from the date an interested party formally complains to the public agency. 3)Requires the Commission to commence immediately and conclude within 45 days from the receipt of the request for Commission review of the accounting procedures of a participating public agency when an interested party presents evidence the work is to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less expensively by the public agency. SB 694 Page 2 4)Requires the Commission to commence immediately and conclude within 90 days from the receipt of the request for Commission review of the accounting procedures of a participating public agency when an interested party presents evidence the work exceeded the force account limits or the work has been improperly classified as maintenance. EXISTING LAW : 1)Authorizes local agencies to opt in to the Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (UPCCAA). 2)Requires the Commission to review the accounting procedures of a participating public agency when an interested party presents evidence that the work undertaken by the public agency falls within any of the following categories: a) The work is to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less expensively by the public agency; b) The work exceeded the force account limits; or, c) The work has been improperly classified as maintenance. 3)Requires a request for a review by the Commission to be in writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than five business days from the date the public agency has rejected all bids, claiming the work can be done less expensively by the public agency. 4)Requires a request for a review by the Commission to be in writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than five days from the date an interested party formally complains to the public agency. 5)Requires the Commission to commence the review immediately and conclude within 30 days from the receipt of the request for Commission review. 6)Prohibits the public agency being reviewed by the Commission for work that is to be performed by a public agency after SB 694 Page 3 rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less expensively by the public agency, from proceeding on the project until a final decision is received by the commission. 7)Authorizes the Commission, if it finds a public agency has violated UPCCAA, to require the public agency to abandon the project or award the project to the lowest responsible bidder, or compel the public agency to submit the Commission's finding to the local governing body. 8)Authorizes the Commission to suspend a public agency's ability to use the UPCCAA for five years if the public agency has violated UPCCAA three times within a 10-year period. FISCAL EFFECT : None COMMENTS : 1)UPCCAA took effect in 1983. UPCCAA, which allows any city, county, redevelopment agency, special district, school district, and community college district to voluntarily opt in, provides for a streamlined awards process so long as the local agency follows the cost accounting procedures set forth in the Cost Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual of the Commission. UPCCAA's thresholds are $30,000 for force account, $125,000 or less for informal bidding procedures, and $125,000 or more for formal bidding procedures. As of June 10, 2009, 708 local agencies have opted in to UPCCAA. A local agency can withdraw at any time from UPCCAA. The 14-member Commission also provides the State Controller with recommended policies and procedures for public projects. The Commission membership is comprised of representatives from both public agencies and private industry. Every five years, the Commission reviews the informal bid limits for inflation and other factors to determine when increases should be made. The last limit increases were in July 1, 2005. However, many local agencies operate under the Local Agency Public Construction Act (LAPCA). LAPCA provides competitive bidding thresholds that vary depending on the agency or kind of work. In a few districts competitive bidding is required for all contracts, regardless of threshold, and for others SB 694 Page 4 there is no competitive bidding required at all. 2)According to the author, five business days does not provide a fair and reasonable amount of time for an objection to be compiled and filed with both the public entity and the Commission. With many local agencies meeting on Wednesday evenings, a complainant is unable to obtain documents from the necessary parties, review the documents, and get a certified/registered complaint sent. With the short time span in current law, complaints are filed immediately to meet the deadline and then must be withdrawn after the complainant has had proper time to review the information and see that no commission review is needed. According to the author, this change would save local agencies and the Commission time and money. Furthermore, the author says extending the deadline for Commission review ensures the Commission has an adequate amount of time to make a sound decision regarding the complaint. 3)Support Arguments : Supporters, Engineering Contractors' Association, say extending the deadlines on when requests for review can be submitted to the Commission and the deadlines for the Commission to render a decision help the entire process run more smoothly and efficiently. Opposition Arguments : Opponents might say extending the deadlines for submitting requests and the timelines for the Commission to review those requests unnecessarily slows down the review process. 4)This bill is double-referred to the Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection. SB 694 Page 5 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support Engineering Contractors' Association [SPONSOR] Air Conditioning Sheet Metal Association Air-conditioning & Refrigeration Contractors Association American Fence Contractors' Association, CA Chapter American Subcontractors Association CA, Inc. CA Fence Contractors' Association CA Legislative Conference of the Plumbing, Heating and Piping Industry Construction Industry Force Account Council John Chiang, State Controller Engineering Contractors' Association Flasher/Barricade Association Marin Builders' Association National Electrical Contractors Association, CA Chapters Opposition None on file Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer R. Klein / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958