BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 39|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 39
Author: De León (D) and Steinberg (D), et al.
Amended: 5/28/13
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 8-0, 4/17/13
AYES: Liu, Block, Correa, Hancock, Hueso, Huff, Jackson,
Monning
NO VOTE RECORDED: Wyland
SENATE ENERGY, UTIL. & COMMUNIC. COMM. : 11-0, 4/30/13
AYES: Padilla, Fuller, Cannella, Corbett, De León, DeSaulnier,
Hill, Knight, Pavley, Wolk, Wright
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-0, 5/23/13
AYES: De León, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters, Gaines
SUBJECT : Energy: school facilities: energy efficiency
upgrade projects
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill enacts the Clean Energy Employment and
Student Advancement (CEESA) Act of 2013 and requires the Office
of Public School Construction, in coordination with the State
Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission
(SERCDC), to develop the CEESA Program to award grants, based on
the average daily attendance, to a school district, weighted as
CONTINUED
SB 39
Page
2
specified, for energy efficiency upgrade projects pursuant to
the California Clean Energy Jobs Act, as specified. This bill
specifies the bidding requirements for contracts for projects
that are funded, in whole or in part, by moneys from the Clean
Energy Job Creation Fund (Fund) and requires contractors for
those contracts to meet specified requirements. This bill
requires, with specified exceptions, the Department of
Industrial Relations (DIR) to monitor and enforce applicable
prevailing wage requirements and authorizes the Director of DIR
to charge the contracting agency for its reasonable and directly
related costs incurred.
ANALYSIS : In November 2012, the voters passed Proposition 39,
enacting the Act which changed the way multistate corporations
are taxed in California and provided for the use of the new
revenues this change would generate. Elements of the Act
include the following:
1.From 2013-14 through 2017-18, half of the annual revenue (up
to $550 million) raised from the measure must be transferred
to a new Fund. Monies in the Fund are to be available for
appropriation to fund projects that create jobs in California,
improving energy efficiency and expanding clean energy
generation.
2.An outline of the type of eligible projects that could be
included at public schools, colleges, universities, and other
public buildings and for job training and workforce
development purposes and public-private partnerships.
3.Criteria applicable to all fund expenditures which includes
that:
A. Project selection and oversight be managed by state and
local government agencies with expertise in managing energy
projects and programs.
B. Projects be selected on the basis of in-state job
creation and energy benefits, cost-effectiveness (total
benefits greater than project costs over time, including
non-energy benefits).
C. Contract requirements to identify project
specifications, costs, and project energy savings.
CONTINUED
SB 39
Page
3
D. All projects are subject to audit.
E. Program overhead costs are capped at 4%.
F. Funds only are appropriated to agencies with established
expertise in managing energy projects and programs.
G. All funded programs are required to coordinate with the
California Energy Commission (CEC) and the Public Utilities
Commission (PUC) in order to avoid duplication and leverage
existing energy efficiency and clean energy efforts.
1.Establishment of a Citizens Oversight Board (COB) comprised of
nine members, to be appointed by the Treasurer, Controller,
and Attorney General and tasked with the responsibility of
annually reviewing all fund expenditures, commissioning and
reviewing an independent audit of the fund and a selection of
completed projects and their effectiveness in meeting the
Act's objectives, and annually publishing a complete
accounting of all expenditures. The COB is also required to
submit an evaluation of the program to the Legislature
identifying any necessary changes to meet the Act's
objectives.
Existing law:
1.Establishes the ten-member State Allocation Board (SAB) and
provides that members consist of the Director of Finance; the
Director of Department of General Services (DGS); a person
appointed by the Governor; the Superintendent of Public
Instruction; three members of the Senate appointed by the
Senate Committee on Rules two of whom shall belong to the
majority party and one of whom shall belong to the minority
party; and three members of the Assembly appointed by the
Speaker of the Assembly, two of whom shall belong to the
majority party and one of whom shall belong to the minority
party.
2.Authorizes the SAB to apportion funds for the construction of
school facilities and to establish any qualifications,
procedures and policies, and rules and regulations it deems
necessary to administer and expend funds made available for
school facility construction purposes.
CONTINUED
SB 39
Page
4
3.Establishes the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC)
within DGS and authorizes DGS to assign an executive officer
to the OPSC. The executive officer may be appointed by the
Governor, upon recommendation of the Director of DGS and
serves at the Director's pleasure.
This bill:
1. Enacts the CEESA Act of 2013 and requires the Office of
Public School Construction, in coordination with the SERCDC,
to develop the CEESA Program to award grants, based on the
average daily attendance, to a school district, weighted as
specified, for energy efficiency upgrade projects pursuant to
the California Clean Energy Jobs Act.
2. Requires the SERCDC to develop criteria for project
development, approval, and energy savings reporting.
3. Requires the SERCDC to establish a technical assistance
grant program to assist in the assessment, development, and
implementation of energy upgrade projects for school
districts and charter schools without access to a
utility-sponsored technical assistance program.
4. Requires the SERCDC, in coordination with the University of
California energy research centers, to develop innovative
facility evaluation systems to assist school districts with
facility evaluations, benchmarking, scoping, and
investigation.
5. Authorizes the SERCDC, in consultation with the California
Conservation Corps and the certified community conservation
corps, to provide preaudit, audit, and postinstallation
verification services to assist school districts.
6. Requires the SERCDC to develop guidelines for a financing
program for projects for which grants are inappropriate or
not needed for implementation.
7. Requires the SERCDC to develop a database to quantify the
costs and benefits of funded projects.
8. Requires a school district or a charter school facility
CONTINUED
SB 39
Page
5
receiving moneys from the Fund to repay those moneys under
specified conditions. For the 2013-14 fiscal year, the bill
provides that moneys from the fund, upon appropriation by the
Legislature, would be available to fund energy efficiency
projects that are on the Emergency Repair Program unfunded
approval list as of January 1, 2013.
9. Specifies the bidding requirements for contracts for
projects that are funded, in whole or in part, by moneys from
the Fund and requires contractors for those contracts to meet
specified requirements.
10.Requires, with specified exceptions, the DIR to monitor and
enforce applicable prevailing wage requirements and
authorizes the DIR to charge the contracting agency for its
reasonable and directly related costs incurred.
Comments
Proposition 39 specifically articulates as its objective the
creation and then employment of Californians in energy
efficiency and clean energy jobs and achievement of the maximum
amount of job creation and energy benefits with available funds.
It also provides that funding to achieve these objectives may
be provided for:
1.Projects to conduct energy efficiency retrofits and clean
energy installations in public schools, universities and
colleges, and other public facilities.
2.Financial and technical assistance that includes revolving
loan funds and reduced interests loans for these projects at
other public facilities and for public-private partnerships.
3.Training and employment of disadvantaged youth, veterans, and
others, on energy efficiency and clean energy projects,
specifically citing the California Conservation Corps,
Certified Community Conservation Corps, YouthBuild, and other
existing workforce development programs.
The Governor's proposed 2013-14 budget includes a plan to
implement the provisions of Proposition 39 by designating all
Fund monies for K-12 schools and community colleges in 2013-14
and for the subsequent four years.
CONTINUED
SB 39
Page
6
The Governor's proposal appropriates 89% of the funding to the
California Department of Education (CDE) and 11% to the CCC
Chancellor's Office who are to allocate this funding to
districts on a per-student basis.
The CDE and Chancellor's Office would issue guidelines, which
could be developed in consultation with CEC and the PUC, for
prioritizing the use of the funds by districts. School
districts and community college districts would report their
project expenditure information to CDE and the Chancellor's
Office, respectively, upon project completion. According to the
Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO), in 2013-14, the Governor's
proposal for distribution of these funds would result in school
districts and community college districts receiving $67 and $45
per student, respectively.
The LAO has proposed an alternative to the Governor's proposal
which would designate the CEC as the lead agency, in
consultation with the PUC for distributing Fund monies through a
competitive grant program open to all public agencies.
Applicants would first be required to have an energy audit
performed to identify potential cost-effective energy upgrades,
and include in their application information regarding climate
zone, size, design, and age of a building.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Annual costs likely in the hundreds of thousands to low
millions from the Fund (special fund) for OPSC for the
administration of the program.
Annual costs of approximately $200,000 from the Fund for SDE
staff and outreach travel.
Annual costs likely in the hundreds of thousands from the Fund
for the State Allocation Board to approve grants.
Minor and absorbable cost to the PUC for consulting with OPSC.
CONTINUED
SB 39
Page
7
One-time costs in the millions of dollars from the Fund in FY
2013-14 to the CEC to develop criteria and guidelines.
SUPPORT : (Per Senate Education Committee analysis 4/17/13,
unable to reverify at time of writing)
State Superintendent of Public Instruction
African American Student Social Work Association
American Lung Association
California Federation of Teachers
California School Administrators Association
California School Boards Association
California School Employees Association, AFL-CIO
Coalition for Adequate school Housing
County Schools Facilities Consortium
Los Angeles Unified School District
PolicyLink
Public Advocates
Sacramento City Unified School District
School Energy Coalition
Solar Energy Association
South Coast Air Quality Management District
State Building Trades Council
TRANE
US Green Council
USPC California
PQ:ej:nl 5/28/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED