BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 963
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 17, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 963 (Levine) - As Amended: March 20, 2013
Policy Committee:
AccountabilityVote:12-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill provides a 3% bid preference on certain state
contracts for bidders having a record of "environmentally
preferable purchasing," as currently defined in state law.
Specifically, this bill requires, on state contracts for goods
and services:
1)Where the contract award is based on the lowest responsible
bidder, that state agencies select the bidder with a record of
environmentally preferable purchasing over a low bidder
without a similar record, if the difference in bids is 3% or
less.
2)Where the award is determined by evaluation and scoring, that
state agencies consider a bidder's environmentally preferable
purchasing.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)To the extent competitively bid contracts are awarded to other
than the lowest bidder, the state will incur additional costs
on contracts. These costs are unknown, but given the
considerable volume of state contracting, could total at least
several hundred thousand dollars annually (General Fund and
various special funds).
[The Department of General Services (DGS) estimates that, in
2011-12, there were 1,900 goods or services contracts totaling
about $840 million that would have been subject to this bill.
(Information on the portion of this amount involving contracts
awarded based on the lowest bidder was not readily available.]
AB 963
Page 2
2)DGS will also incur significant one-time administrative costs
to implement the new contracting requirement, i.e to amend
general contract language and instruct other state agencies on
the new requirements. In addition, adding a new factor for
awarding contracts is likely to result in additional protests
from unsuccessful bidders, with resulting costs and contract
delays.
COMMENTS
1)Current law defines "environmentally preferable purchasing" as
the procurement or acquisition of goods and services having a
reduced effect on human health and the environment compared
with competing goods or services serving the same purpose.
This comparison shall take into consideration, to the extent
feasible, raw materials acquisition, production,
manufacturing, packaging, distribution, reuse, operation,
maintenance, disposal, energy efficiency, product performance,
durability, safety, the needs of the purchaser, and cost. DGS
is charged with promoting the use of environmentally
preferable purchasing by state agencies.
2)Purpose . The author believes statutory fiscal incentive is
needed to ensure more use of environmentally preferable
products by vendors seeking state contracts. The author notes
that Arkansas, Connecticut, Hawaii, Idaho, and Virginia have
similar laws.
3)Prior Legislation . In 2012, SB 1427 (De Leon), which provided
a 5% preference for bidders on state contracts for electronic
goods if the bidder offered to fulfill the entire contract
only with "refurbished electronics," was held on this
committee's Suspense file.
Also in 2012, AB 2426 (Galgiani), which provided a 5%
preference for bidders on public works contracts who agreed to
employ veterans, was held on this committee's Suspense file.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081