BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
635 (De La Torre)
Hearing Date: 8/12/2010 Amended: 8/5/2010
Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: G O 6-2
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 635, an urgency measure, would require a school
district, community college district, state university, or state
agency to require decisions, as to whether proposed substitute
items in connection with a project to replace or repair a roof
are equal, to be made by an independent architect, engineer, or
roofing consultant. This bill would set forth requirements for
the bidding specifications for these roofing projects. This
bill would require an architect, engineer, roofing consultant,
and other specified persons or entities to sign a certification
related to financial relationships. This bill would require a
school district, community college district, state university,
or state agency to publish on its Internet Web site certain
information pertaining to roofing projects. This bill would
also authorize the State Allocation Board, the Office of Public
School Construction, and the Department of General Services to
provide educational programs, information or online material to
school and state government administrators in relation to these
matters. By imposing duties on school districts, this bill
would create a state mandated local program.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Fund
Increased roof project Unknown, major costs ongoing
General*/
bid and oversight Special/
requirements Bond
* State mandated local program costs reimbursable from the
General Fund
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the
Suspense File.
For the purposes of this bill, a roof project means a project
for the replacement or repair of a roof of a public facility.
The provisions of the bill would not apply to new construction.
This bill would set forth the requirements by which, for any
roof project, a material, project, thing, or service shall be
considered equal.
This bill would require any roof project to name a minimum of
three separate manufacturers that share no financial,
partnership, or subsidiary relationships, or interests, or
shared product lines or require performance standards that at
least three manufacturers have indicated, in writing, in advance
of the bidding period, the ability to comply.
Specifications requiring proprietary products or a proprietary
warranty may not be included in specifications for a roof
project if these items would cost more than ten
Page 2
AB 635 (De La Torre)
percent more than for similar projects utilizing open
competitive bidding without a requirement for proprietary
products or a proprietary warranty. If a substitution is
offered in a bid for a roof project, the district or
governmental body shall require decisions on whether the
proposed substitution is equal to be made by an independent
architect, engineer, or roofing consultant based on industry
standards.
Preliminary information indicates the cost to require decisions
on whether a proposed substitution is equal may increase a roof
project by up to $10,000. The Los Angeles Community College
District has, at this time, nearly 30 roofs needing replacement.
If the independent review increased the cost of each project by
$5,000 to $10,000, the district would have increased state
mandated costs of $150,000 to $300,000. The district is
approximately ten percent of community college system. K-12
school districts would incur similar per project costs. The
California State University and all state agencies would also
incur such costs. To the extent the independent review resulted
in an equal substitution of a lower cost, the project may have
savings over the initial specifications.
A district or governmental body shall ensure and verify in
writing that an architect, engineer, or roofing consultant
develops the plans and specifications for a roof project to
ensure the project conforms to state codes. However, if a
substitution is offered, and determined equal by the independent
review noted above, this may require the initial architect,
engineer, or roofing consultant or district or governmental body
to verify a project that now uses materials the project was not
initially designed for. This may result in the initial
architect, engineer, or roofing consultant incurring increased
costs or liability resulting from having to certify a project
that person may not determine is equal. This could increase
project costs.