BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
2036 (B Berryhill)
Hearing Date: 8/12/2010 Amended: 7/15/2010
Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: G O 8-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 2036 would require an officer, department,
board, or commission taking bids for the construction of a
public work or improvement to distribute contract documents at
no charge to prospective bidders, including subcontractors and
suppliers. Contract documents would be made available at no
charge to contractor plan room services when requested by a
contractor plan room service. This bill would provide that if a
deposit is required as part of a paper contract documents
distribution policy, the deposit shall not exceed $250 per set
and shall be refunded within 14 days after award of the project,
as specified. This bill would require a government entity to
reimburse a landscape architect, architect, or professional
engineer for the actual costs of preparation and distribution of
plans and specifications.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Fund
Document charge prohibition Unknown, potentially
significant loss of General/
of fee revenue, ongoing. Negligible
toSpecial/ significant increase in
project costs, Bond
potentially offset by more bidders on
small projects and potentially lower bids
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill may meet the criteria for referral to
the Suspense File.
This bill states that a governmental entity shall reimburse a
landscape architect, architect, or professional engineer for the
actual costs of preparation and distribution of plans and
specifications. Staff notes the practical effect of this
language is unclear. For example, is a low bid the same as
actual cost? Would this exclude drawings which are noted
earlier in the bill as being part of a project's contract
documents?
Staff notes the language of the bill is inconsistent. For
example, the bill refers to construction of a public work or
improvement and later to a proposed public improvement and
public works projects. The bill refers to the awarding of a
project which more accurately should be the awarding of a
contract. Also, in various places, the bill refers to an
officer, department, board or commission, later to government
entity and finally, public agencies.
At this time, the fiscal impact of this bill is unclear. For
example, the Department of General Services charges potential
contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers for copies of bid
sets. The department sends free sets to contractor plan room
services and builder exchanges in the area of the project so
that contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers can review bid
sets at no cost. Persons can go to the department's contracts
Page 2
AB 2036 (B Berryhill)
office to review the plans. The department has an on-line plan
room where persons can review bid sets at no cost. This
benefits smaller subcontractors and suppliers that do not want
to buy an entire set.
The cost of the sets can vary greatly depending on the size of
the project and the size of the bid set. A large project can
have several hundreds pages of drawings and fill large binders
with printed material. For example:
- A $3.5 million CalFIRE fire station in Colfax was $110 per bid
set. 29 contractors and subcontractors purchased sets of plans
at a total cost of $3,250.
- A $40 million renovation of the Library and Courts project was
$350 per bid set. 70 contractors and subcontractors purchased
sets of plans at a total cost of $25,000.
If contractors, subcontractors or suppliers paid a deposit that
was refundable, the contracting entity would incur the cost of
printing those sets of construction documents. The practical
effect of this would be for the contracting entity to increase
the cost of the project in order to recover this cost. Whether
such increases would be recovered by increased bidder interest
and lower bids is unknown as is whether, using the example of
the CalFIRE fire station, $110 for a bid set discourages
bidding.
Charging a fee for contract documents may serve to limit the
interest in bidding on a project to bidders with adequate
resources. Making contract documents available without charge
would likely increase the number of contract documents
requested. Currently, persons typically wait until after the
mandatory bid walk or a review of the free plans at the builders
exchange before paying for contract documents.