BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2551
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
2551 (Gallagher, et al.)
As Amended April 27, 2016
Majority vote
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Water |13-1 |Levine, Gallagher, |Medina |
| | |Bigelow, Dodd, | |
| | |Eggman, Cristina | |
| | |Garcia, Eduardo | |
| | |Garcia, Gomez, Lopez, | |
| | |Mathis, Olsen, Salas, | |
| | |Williams | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |20-0 |Gonzalez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bloom, Bonilla, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Patterson, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, Roger | |
| | |Hernández, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Obernolte, | |
| | |Quirk, Santiago, | |
| | |Wagner, Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
AB 2551
Page 2
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Authorizes alternative contracting methods for surface
storage projects that receive Proposition 1 funding and
conditions the use of alternative project delivery methods on
meeting specific solicitation, qualification, and selection
requirements. Specifically, this bill:
1)Authorizes the use of construction management at-risk,
design-build, or design-build-operate project delivery methods
for Proposition 1 funded surface storage projects.
2)Specifies the process by which a local agency will solicit
bids on a project.
3)Prohibits a bidder from prequalifying unless they use a
skilled and trained workforce, as defined.
4)Requires the local agency to make a list of prequalified
bidders available to the public.
5)Specifies the bid selection process to be made from the pool
of prequalified bidders.
EXSITING LAW:
1)Authorizes in various ways the use of alternative project
delivery methods for state and local agencies.
AB 2551
Page 3
2)Makes the surface storage projects identified in the CALFED
Bay-Delta Program Record of Decision, except projects
prohibited by the California Wild and Scenic Rivers Act,
eligible for $2.7 billion in funding continuously appropriated
to the California Water Commission (CWC) under Proposition 1.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, there are unknown future costs or savings depending
on the outcomes of the projects selected for alternative project
delivery. Given that these are likely to be large, complex
projects, the costs or savings could be significant.
COMMENTS: The traditional public works contracting method is
known as design-bid-build, whereby project design is done under
contract by an architectural/engineering firm, then upon
completion of the design phase, the construction phase is put
out to bid and the contract is awarded to the lowest responsible
bidder.
Increasing use of alternative project delivery methods have been
occurring in the public sector over the last 15 years. Research
on alternative project delivery methods have shown these methods
can lead to greater flexibility and accountability, higher
quality, faster completion and lower overall project costs.
This bill authorizes the use of alternative methods of project
delivery for surface storage projects that receive Proposition 1
funding. This bill does not alter the requirements currently
required under Proposition 1. It lays out the specific process
by which a project could utilize the alternative methods. Only
after meeting the requirements of Proposition 1, receiving
Proposition 1 funding, and meeting the solicitation and
evaluation requirements in this bill, will a surface storage
project be able to utilize alternative project delivery methods.
AB 2551
Page 4
Proposition 1 authorizes the CWC to pay up to half of the cost
of new water storage projects, including dams and projects that
replenish groundwater. This funding can only be used to cover
costs related to the "public benefits" associated with water
storage projects, including restoring habitats, improving water
quality, reducing damage from floods, responding to emergencies,
and improving recreation.
Concerns have been raised by opponents that water storage
projects are particularly complex, expensive projects that are
not appropriate for alternative procurement. The potential
failure of a large storage project could have catastrophic
public safety and economic consequences. There is the potential
that this bill eliminates competitive bidding, allows a private
contractor or consortium to inspect and sign off on their own
work, and could increase project delivery costs in some
circumstances.
Analysis Prepared by:
Ryan Ojakian / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096
FN: 0003039