BILL ANALYSIS
SB 694
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 16, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Cameron Smyth, Chair
SB 694 (Correa) - As Amended: May 18, 2010
SENATE VOTE : 36-0
SUBJECT : Public contracts: public works: competitive bidding:
procedures.
SUMMARY : Requires a request for a review by the California
Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (Commission)
from an interested party who has presented evidence that the
work is to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all
bids, claiming work can be done less expensively by the public
agency, to be in writing and sent by certified or registered
mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than eight
business days from the date the public agency has rejected all
bids. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires a request for a review by the Commission from an
interested party who has presented evidence that the work is
to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all bids,
claiming work can be done less expensively by the public
agency, to be in writing and sent by certified or registered
mail received by the Commission postmarked no later than eight
business days from the date the public agency has rejected all
bids.
2)Requires a request for a review by the Commission from an
interested party who has presented evidence that the work
exceeded the force account limits or the work has been
improperly classified as maintenance to be in writing and sent
by certified or registered mail received by the Commission
postmarked no later than eight days from the date an
interested party formally complains to the public agency.
3)Requires the Commission to commence immediately and conclude
within 45 days from the receipt of the request for Commission
review of the accounting procedures of a participating public
agency when an interested party presents evidence the work is
to be performed by a public agency after rejecting all bids,
claiming work can be done less expensively by the public
agency.
SB 694
Page 2
4)Requires the Commission to commence immediately and conclude
within 90 days from the receipt of the request for Commission
review of the accounting procedures of a participating public
agency when an interested party presents evidence the work
exceeded the force account limits or the work has been
improperly classified as maintenance.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes local agencies to opt in to the Uniform Public
Construction Cost Accounting Act (UPCCAA).
2)Requires the Commission to review the accounting procedures of
a participating public agency when an interested party
presents evidence that the work undertaken by the public
agency falls within any of the following categories:
a) The work is to be performed by a public agency after
rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less
expensively by the public agency;
b) The work exceeded the force account limits; or,
c) The work has been improperly classified as maintenance.
3)Requires a request for a review by the Commission to be in
writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by
the Commission postmarked no later than five business days
from the date the public agency has rejected all bids,
claiming the work can be done less expensively by the public
agency.
4)Requires a request for a review by the Commission to be in
writing and sent by certified or registered mail received by
the Commission postmarked no later than five days from the
date an interested party formally complains to the public
agency.
5)Requires the Commission to commence the review immediately and
conclude within 30 days from the receipt of the request for
Commission review.
6)Prohibits the public agency being reviewed by the Commission
for work that is to be performed by a public agency after
SB 694
Page 3
rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less expensively
by the public agency, from proceeding on the project until a
final decision is received by the commission.
7)Authorizes the Commission, if it finds a public agency has
violated UPCCAA, to require the public agency to abandon the
project or award the project to the lowest responsible bidder,
or compel the public agency to submit the Commission's finding
to the local governing body.
8)Authorizes the Commission to suspend a public agency's ability
to use the UPCCAA for five years if the public agency has
violated UPCCAA three times within a 10-year period.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)UPCCAA took effect in 1983. UPCCAA, which allows any city,
county, redevelopment agency, special district, school
district, and community college district to voluntarily opt
in, provides for a streamlined awards process so long as the
local agency follows the cost accounting procedures set forth
in the Cost Accounting Policies and Procedures Manual of the
Commission. UPCCAA's thresholds are $30,000 for force
account, $125,000 or less for informal bidding procedures, and
$125,000 or more for formal bidding procedures. As of June
10, 2009, 708 local agencies have opted in to UPCCAA. A local
agency can withdraw at any time from UPCCAA.
The 14-member Commission also provides the State Controller with
recommended policies and procedures for public projects. The
Commission membership is comprised of representatives from
both public agencies and private industry. Every five years,
the
Commission reviews the informal bid limits for inflation and
other factors to determine when increases should be made. The
last limit increases were in July 1, 2005.
However, many local agencies operate under the Local Agency
Public Construction Act (LAPCA). LAPCA provides competitive
bidding thresholds that vary depending on the agency or kind
of work. In a few districts competitive bidding is required
for all contracts, regardless of threshold, and for others
SB 694
Page 4
there is no competitive bidding required at all.
2)According to the author, five business days does not provide a
fair and reasonable amount
of time for an objection to be compiled and filed with both the
public entity and the Commission. With many local agencies
meeting on Wednesday evenings, a complainant is unable to
obtain documents from the necessary parties, review the
documents, and get a certified/registered complaint sent.
With the short time span in current law, complaints are filed
immediately to meet the deadline and then must be withdrawn
after the complainant has had proper time to review the
information and see that no commission review is needed.
According to the author, this change would save local agencies
and the Commission time and money.
Furthermore, the author says extending the deadline for
Commission review ensures the Commission has an adequate
amount of time to make a sound decision regarding the
complaint.
3)Support Arguments : Supporters, Engineering Contractors'
Association, say extending the deadlines on when requests for
review can be submitted to the Commission and the deadlines
for the Commission to render a decision help the entire
process run more smoothly and efficiently.
Opposition Arguments : Opponents might say extending the
deadlines for submitting requests and the timelines for the
Commission to review those requests unnecessarily slows down
the review process.
4)This bill is double-referred to the Committee on Business,
Professions and Consumer Protection.
SB 694
Page 5
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Engineering Contractors' Association [SPONSOR]
Air Conditioning Sheet Metal Association
Air-conditioning & Refrigeration Contractors Association
American Fence Contractors' Association, CA Chapter
American Subcontractors Association CA, Inc.
CA Fence Contractors' Association
CA Legislative Conference of the Plumbing, Heating and Piping
Industry
Construction Industry Force Account Council
John Chiang, State Controller
Engineering Contractors' Association
Flasher/Barricade Association
Marin Builders' Association
National Electrical Contractors Association, CA Chapters
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Jennifer R. Klein / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958